Denis O'Brien must be punch-drunk with the coverage he has had in the Irish media in recent times.

Probably the richest Irish businessman of his generation, he generated a large amount of media coverage a few weeks back when it was announced that he had bought out the minority shareholders in his Caribbean Digicel group.

Increasing the level of debt in the business meant he could do this while at the same time giving himself a nice present of €604 million. His Irish non- resident status means he will pay no Irish tax on this windfall and for all we know, he may end up paying little or no tax anywhere.

The expectation is that he will continue to run and develop the Digicel group for the coming period and then sell it for a huge price that may send him all the way to the top of the Irish rich list.

Those in the Irish business world who are interested in such matters are left wondering what his plans are for the loot that came his way last month, as well as for the period after he finally sells out in the Caribbean. He may still have plans for new telecoms ventures in the United States and/or in the Middle East.

His involvement in the media business means his career is also of particular interest to our political masters. Mr O'Brien's radio empire is all the time growing, and there is also his famous stake in Independent News & Media.

The purchase of a controlling stake in, or even an outright purchase of, the Independent group in a number of years, when his occasional sparring partner Sir Anthony O'Reilly decides to withdraw, has to be a distinct possibility.

Foreign ownership of the media has made people uneasy in a number of jurisdictions and it is arguable that an Irish investor taking over from Sir Anthony (himself an Irish non-resident), would be an improvement over the Independent group being purchased by some foreign individual or media group.

(The Independent group is of course itself a global media player but in the context of this article, an Irish-centred view can be held to prevail.)

As well as his coverage in the business press, Mr O'Brien also tends to feature regularly in the news for his social or charitable activities. Unlike most mega- league business figures, his philanthropic activities sometimes have a political edge.

The Frontline organisation, which he funds, is concerned with supporting people active in the human rights arena, most of the time in parts of the world where it is dangerous to do so. He has also been involved in anti-racism campaigns.

However in terms of Irish media coverage, it is definitely a case of one step forward, one step back.

His philanthropic activities are often countered by mutterings about his non- resident tax status, and then there is the never-ending Moriarty tribunal.

The tribunal's inquiries into Michael Lowry and financial dealings, if any, that he may have had with Mr O'Brien, are an illustration of the limits of the power of the billionaire in Irish society.

Mr O'Brien has a crew of solicitors and barristers working for him and must have spent a small fortune in the High Court and Supreme Court recently seeking to stop the tribunal's inquiry into the Doncaster Rovers stadium transaction, but the tribunal's march continues.

The current module of the tribunal has been one of the oddest to date, in some ways. Much of the evidence heard was against the backdrop of material from the files of William Fry solicitors, who act for Mr O'Brien.

As Owen O'Connell, a senior partner with William Fry, observed last week, private advice by the firm to its client tends to end up with the tribunal and at times even forms part of the evidence heard.

Tribunals are not courts, not the same species, and at times they seem to be a different genus. Mr Lowry's barrister, Donal O'Donnell SC, has on a number of occasions asked that the tribunal outline what rules apply to what is going on, but he has not yet received a reply.

The chairman of the Moriarty tribunal happens to be a judge, but the law doesn't require a tribunal chairman to be a judge.

In his report on the late Charles Haughey, Mr Justice Michael Moriarty stated his view that as his tribunal was inquisitorial, rather than adversarial, it would not be bound by the rules of evidence or procedures designed for court cases.

The conclusions he reaches are in no sense findings of criminal or civil liability "and represent no more than what should be a reasoned and informed expression of opinion".

In broad terms it can be said that rules designed to protect the rights of the individual in a court setting are abandoned in tribunal settings.

The point of doing this is to allow the tribunal to establish what it can in relation to a matter of significant public importance - in the instance at hand, suspected political corruption.

A lawyer might say that tribunal findings don't have the same weight as findings in a courtroom, but for the general public the difference is probably of little interest, a point of which Mr O'Brien is no doubt all too keenly aware.

His huge wealth and concomitant power do not live in a parallel universe to what is going on in Dublin Castle.

A harsh opinion from the judge would have an effect on any plans he might have to become a larger player in the Irish economy and society generally.

A positive opinion would mean all systems go.