THE Minister for Social Welfare, Mr De Rossa, told the High Court that in 1991 he had expelled a member of the WP who was involved in hijacking a truckload of beer.
In the seventh day of the libel action by Mr De Rossa against Independent Newspapers, Mr Patrick MacEntee SC questioned the Democratic Left leader about an interview in the Evening Herald dated March 5th, 1992, with Eamon Carr.
It was in the context of the split between the WP and New Agenda as Democratic Left was then called.
In part of the interview which dealt with the Official IRA, Eamon Carr asked: "Can you expect the electorate to subscribe to the new party given that its members' for years denied any involvement with the Official IRA and then discovered that there was that connection and that they had either been hoodwinked or were telling lies?"
Mr De Rossa was quoted as saying: "People will have to make up their own minds on the basis of what they know of the individuals concerned.
"The fact that some people associated with the Workers' Party chose to be involved in other kinds of activity damaged
Mr De Rossa accepted that that was the sense of what he had said. It had been a long interview and both the questions and answers had been compressed. He had not complained to the Evening Herald because he felt it was a reasonably fair representation of what he said.
Counsel asked who were "those people associated with the WP who chose to be involved in other kinds of activity?"
Mr De Ross a said there had been reports and rumours about people engaged in illegal activity in Northern Ireland and it was claimed by various people that these were associated with the WP and this had damaged the party in his view.
In late 1991, a report was brought to his attention that some men had been charged with a hijacking of a truckload of beer and it was alleged in court that they were members of the WP.
He undertook an examination of the WP files and found that one of them was listed as a member in Northern Ireland. He proposed that the person should be expelled from the party and it was agreed unanimously by the ardchomhairle. He could not recall his name.
Mr MacEntee pressed him on who else he had been referring to. Mr De Rossa said that he had already told the court about an alleged connection between the WP and a counterfeiting attempt. That had clearly damaged the party although no such connection was established by gardai but it was clearly damaging to have that kind of report being made.
Counsel asked him how his answer dealt with the contention in Mr Carr's question that there was a connection between the Official IRA and the WP which had been denied for years and was then discovered to exist, thereby revealing the WP had been hoodwinked or was telling lies.
Mr De Rossa said that his reading of Mr Carr's question was that the reference to hoodwinking was the alleged hoodwinking of the electorate.
Counsel put it to him that his assertion that the vast majority of WP members were not in the IRA - or anything else, meant that a minority was in the Official IRA.
Mr De Rossa said that it did not mean that. It meant that there were people associated with the WP, who had engaged in illegal activities such as hijacking of the truck loaded with drink.
Mr MacEntee said Mr De Rossa had told the jury a long time ago that the Official IRA had ceased to exist in 1972.
Mr De Rossa replied: "It ceased to be active, anyhow."
Counsel asked him to explain that distinction.
Mr De Rossa said he would have had no way of knowing if the Official IRA had ceased to exist. He knew it had declared a ceasefire and was no longer engaged in military activity. He had no knowledge of the IRA or any other paramilitary organisation.
Mr MacEntee said he was putting it to Mr De Rossa that his reply in the Eamon Carr interview, in its context, meant he was accepting that people associated with the Workers' Party had chosen to be involved in criminal activities in an Official IRA context and that that had damaged the Workers' Party beyond retrieve.
Mr De Rossa said he was not saying that.
Earlier, Mr MacEntee said that in the wrap-up in the Armstrong interview in The Irish Times, Mr De Rossa had said that "it seems I have been made to carry the can for other people's stupidity". What other people's stupidity?
Mr De Rossa said the whole interview looked at different options and possibilities. The Moscow letter was not from the WP and was not a letter he had anything to do with. The fact that he had to do the interview at all was evidence that he was being made to carry the can for a person's stupidity.
Mr MacEntee asked who the person was. Mr De Rossa said if he knew that or if anybody else knew, that person would be in court rather than him.
Mr MacEntee said: "If you are reluctant to name the person...
Mr De Rossa said: "Sorry, Mr MacEntee, I am not reluctant to name the person. I do not know who the person was who was the author of the letter. I simply do not know.
Asked if he stood over the word "stupidity", Mr De Rossa said he did. Mr MacEntee said the word "criminal" he could understand but "stupid" because it made an admission of special activities?
Mr De Rossa said "stupid" because it made outrageous claims about the WP, income and outgoings of the WP, and claims about decisions of the WP which were never made.
Later, under re-examination by his own counsel, Mr Paul O'Higgins SC, Mr De Rossa said that before his interview with The Irish Times, Mr Ed O'Loughlin from that newspaper called to his office to collect copies of his signature.
Asked by Mr O'Higgins when was the first time he had heard about a handwriting expert, he said he first heard about it when he rang Mr Nash. "I was looking to see if I could establish that (the Moscow letter signature) was a forgery and he told me he had already been employed by The Irish Times and couldn't act for me."