PROF MICHAEL ANDERSEN:A FURTHER year was added to the life of the Moriarty tribunal as a result of the failure of a Danish telecommunications consultant to give evidence until last year, the report of the tribunal found.
It wasn’t until last October that Prof Michael Andersen of Andersen Management International – the firm retained by the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications to advise on the awarding of the second mobile phone licence – agreed to give evidence.
He did so after Denis O’Brien agreed to cover the costs of indemnifying him, something the State had previously refused to provide. He was the tribunal’s final witness.
While the work of the tribunal was substantially concluded when he came forward to give evidence, the tribunal decided nonetheless to hear him. After hearing his evidence the tribunal was of the view that “the weight, reliability and extent of accurate recollection apparent from Mr Andersen’s evidence fell so appreciably below what might have been expected, as to amount to very limited assistance to the tribunal on those matters that were of major consequence”.
The assurance conveyed by his solicitors, as late as October 20th, 2010, that he would attend “to give evidence to assist the tribunal with its inquiries on October 26th next” must, in all the circumstances, be viewed as “verging on the incongruous”, the tribunal added.
Mr Andersen had told the tribunal he had been involved in the awarding of approximately 200 mobile phone licences in jurisdictions throughout the world, very many as lead consultant, and had published extensively on related matters. He regarded the application of Esat Digifone, which won the licence, as one of the most impressive that his company had encountered in any such process worldwide, then or since, particularly in the context of ability to roll out the network.
He said no improper pressures or improprieties of any kind had arisen in the course of the process of selecting the successful bidder. He believed the tribunal legal team displayed a bias against Esat.
The tribunal report says that even making allowance for Mr Andersen’s perception of unwarranted criticism on the part of the tribunal and of protestations of tribunal unfairness, he displayed a particularly marked sensitivity which did not sit easily with the concept of an independent expert witness, of much international experience, advancing careful and dispassionate testimony.
The report adds that his evidence was tendered approximately seven years after the tribunal would have heard it had he made himself available.
“Upon Mr Andersen’s belated indication of availability, it was then necessary in effect for the tribunal to reverse engines, reconsider and reassemble lengthy documentation and prior evidence, and prepare and serve on all affected persons updated hearings books.
“It is not at this juncture feasible to estimate reliably the additional cost to the public purse occasioned by all these matters, which was undoubtedly substantial, but as regards the delay caused, it would seem that, even upon a conservative appraisal, a further year was added to the tribunal’s duration,” the report states.
It adds: “The reluctance, delay and prevarication shown by Mr Andersen in the context of making himself available as a witness to the tribunal was never justified.
“Apart from the circumstances in which Mr Andersen came to testify, the fact of his having declined to do so until approximately nine years had elapsed since his initial dealings with the tribunal cannot be viewed other than as patently unsatisfactory, given his highly significant role in the GSM process, and the aggregate of his involvement in, and extent of remuneration derived from, his activities as a consultant in Ireland in mobile telephony matters.”
The maximum fee payable to his company by the department for consultancy services in connection with the awarding of the licence at the time was £370,000.