THE CHAIRMAN of the Moriarty tribunal has "emphatically rejected" any suggestion of a conspiracy on the part of the tribunal, or any of its legal staff, against businessman Denis O'Brien.
Mr Justice Michael Moriarty made his comment during a heated two hour sitting of the tribunal - which is inquiring into payments to politicians - yesterday morning. The sitting was the tribunal's first since June of last year, when public hearings were thought to have concluded.
In the course of the sitting Mr O'Brien's counsel accused the tribunal of concealing documents and conspiring against his client.
The sitting was convened to facilitate Mr O'Brien's request that his counsel, Eoin McGonigal SC, be allowed cross-examine economist Dr Peter Bacon. But Mr McGonigal did not do so and no evidence was heard.
Seventeen barristers and solicitors representing five parties, including the tribunal, attended the hearing as did Dr Bacon and his solicitor.
Mr McGonigal said Mr O'Brien believed the inquiry was going to produce a report that was damaging to him and critical of the 1995 mobile phone licence competition. He said a solicitor's note of a meeting only conveyed to his client last Friday, but which should have been produced years ago, indicated a direction to Dr Bacon from tribunal legal counsel, to "completely undermine" expert consultants engaged in the 1995 contest which was won by Mr O'Brien's company Esat Digifone.
Dr Bacon gave background assistance to the tribunal's inquiry into the phone licence competition, though this was not disclosed at the time to the witnesses called.
Mr McGonigal said there appeared to have been a "deliberate agenda to damn the competition process and those persons involved".
He accused the tribunal of deliberately concealing the solicitor's note over a period of almost four years, and said this "called into question both the integrity and the credibility of this tribunal". His client believed the nature of the relationship between Dr Bacon and the tribunal should now be inquired into.
Mr McGonigal mentioned tribunal counsel Jerry Healy SC, who acted for Persona, a losing consortium in the 1995 competition that has initiated a claim for damages against the State. He said he was not prepared to cross examine Dr Bacon until Dr Bacon supplied a statement of his dealings with the tribunal. He also suggested a statement should be produced by Mr Healy.
He said Mr O'Brien had wanted to be present for the cross-examination of Dr Bacon, but had not been able to attend. If the tribunal did not adjourn the matter, then Mr O'Brien might take "other steps".
Mr Justice Moriarty said he did not propose to be "goaded into an intemperate response" by Mr McGonigal.
He said there was no conspiracy on the part of the inquiry and the failure to produce the solicitor's note was a "mistake on the part of the tribunal for which I take responsibility". He rejected the contention that the tribunal's relationship with Dr Bacon was "excessively close" or that Mr O'Brien was being treated unfairly.
These arguments had already been heard in the High Court and the Supreme Court, both of which had ruled against Mr O'Brien. To address them again would be "some juristic variant of Groundhog Day". He said Mr McGonigal had "pejoratively, unfairly and for nakedly partisan advantage" questioned the role of Mr Healy.
The chairman said the tribunal's second report, which will deal with matters concerning former minister for transport, energy and communications Michael Lowry is at "quite an advanced stage".
