Journalist Frank Connolly is to submit to the tribunal his notes and transcripts of taped interviews he had with Mr James Gogarty relating to alleged planning corruption.
The tribunal was told yesterday that the senior correspondent of the Sunday Business Post had furnished a note of evidence to the tribunal last January, essentially a summary of evidence of interviews with Mr Gogarty. Mr Desmond O'Neill SC, for the tribunal, said that on May 4th last, Mr Connolly had also submitted a transcript of a tape of a meeting he had with Mr Gogarty in March 1996. This was the first occasion where he was permitted to tape the conversation.
Mr Connolly told the tribunal that Mr Gogarty had shown him documents about the affairs of his former employer, JMSE. At this point Mr Garrett Cooney SC, for JMSE and the Murphys, asked if there were tapes or transcripts of tapes.
Mr O'Neill said that the transcript of the tape also dealt with issues that were beyond those being dealt with by the tribunal. Mr Cooney asked if, apart from the tape-recording, there were other notes and other tapes.
Could those be produced? Mr O'Neill said the matter of what was relevant in the transcript would be determined by the chairman. Mr Cooney complained that he could not properly prepare his cross-examination without sight of documentation. He made an application that the remainder of the evidence be adjourned until all relevant documentation was produced. He did not see why Mr Connolly should be treated differently from any other witness. The chairman said he was the one who decided what evidence would be admitted in public.
Mr Colm Allen SC, for the Baileys and Bovale Ltd, stated that he would make submissions broadly similar to those made by Mr Cooney. It was manifest that the gravamen of the document was to support and buttress Mr Gogarty's personal credibility.
Mr Cooney said: "This tribunal was established as a result of the articles written by Mr Connolly in the Sunday Business Post." Bearing that in mind, it seemed any documents should be produced at the tribunal.
The chairman said the tape was being transcribed and edited. Mr Seamus O Tuathail, counsel for Mr Connolly, said that they had volunteered the main tape. There were other tapes and possibly other notes available. These tapes required to be transcribed, as did the notes from shorthand into full speech. He said there was no need for any order to be made as they were willing to provide them on a voluntary basis.
The chairman said he would undertake to do it quickly within a week of the order. Mr Connolly's evidence in chief should begin.