The Moriarty Tribunal yesterday heard evidence from two of the figures most closely involved in the running of the Ansbacher deposits.
Mr Padraic Collery, a banker and computer expert, gave evidence for about one hour in the morning. The second witness, Ms Joan Williams - long-term personal secretary to the late Mr Des Traynor - took the stand in the afternoon. It is understood she gave evidence for just under half an hour. They were asked to reveal the identities of persons who had funds in the Ansbacher deposits.
Ms Williams was an authorised signatory for at least some of the Ansbacher accounts and was involved in administrative duties connected with the accounts. Mr Collery took over some tasks linked to the accounts when Mr Traynor died in 1994.
The Ansbacher deposits were accounts controlled in Dublin by the late Mr Traynor. They held funds which were technically offshore, in the Cayman Islands, although deposits and withdrawals could be made in Dublin by contacting Mr Traynor. In the late 1980s the deposits held approximately £38 million.
The evidence of Mr Collery and Ms Williams was heard in private; their names were not disclosed by the tribunal. The witnesses were questioned under oath - they were obliged under law to answer questions put to them.
The fact the evidence was taken under oath also means Mr Collery and Ms Williams are covered in terms of any obligations they may feel they were under concerning confidentiality. The impact of the recent Supreme Court ruling in the case taken by Mr Haughey and his family against the tribunal was evident yesterday. Mr Justice Moriarty pointed out that any persons identified as Ansbacher deposit account holders would now be given notice. They will also be given notice that the tribunal is going to seek copies of documents in relation to their accounts.
Yesterday's private hearing was likely to lead to the "disclosure of a considerable amount of information" about a number of persons, he said. Some of these persons may become involved in the public sittings of the tribunal at a later date. Until it becomes clear which accounts, if any, are relevant to the tribunal's inquiries, these people's right to privacy is being protected.
The tribunal is concerned with payments to Mr Charles Haughey and Mr Michael Lowry, and not with the Ansbacher deposits generally.
The same principle in relation to privacy applies to the witnesses. The issue which will decide whether particular individuals become the focus of the tribunal's inquiries is, of course, whether they made any payments to Mr Haughey. Mr Lowry is not linked with the Ansbacher deposits.
Mr Frank Clarke SC, with Ms Emily Egan, yesterday sought, and was granted, limited representation before the tribunal as counsel for the public interest. He will attend the tribunal only when matters affecting the Constitution, the tribunal's terms of reference or the legislation governing tribunals are being discussed. The tribunal is to inform him whenever such matters arise. In cases where they arise unexpectedly, proceedings will be adjourned pending Mr Clarke's attendance.
The chairman, Mr Justice Moriarty, made some comments as to his interpretation of the tribunal's terms of reference. These had to do with issues which had arisen during contacts with interested parties, and were concerned with the definition of companies considered to be associated with Mr Haughey and Mr Lowry and the definition of acts or decisions by the two politicians which would be examined by the tribunal. Both these issues are mentioned in the tribunal's terms of reference.
Mr Eoin McGonigal SC, counsel for Mr Haughey, was present at yesterday's hearing, though Mr Haughey has not as yet sought representation before the tribunal. Mr McGonigal said he was reserving his position in relation to the tribunal's terms of reference.
No indication was given as to when full public hearings of the tribunal might begin. The chairman said he hoped to proceed at the "earliest feasible" date.