Request for documents attempt to "embarrass" De Rossa

INDEPENDENT Newspapers tried to delay the Proinsias De Rossa libel action and cause embarrassment to the Minister when it sought…

INDEPENDENT Newspapers tried to delay the Proinsias De Rossa libel action and cause embarrassment to the Minister when it sought discovery of Workers' Party documents in connection with the trial, it was claimed in the High Court yesterday.

The documents are being sought as part of the company's defence of libel proceedings being brought by the Democratic Left leader against it over an article by Eamon Dunphy in the Sunday Independent in December 1992.

The jury in the original trial last November were discharged following a subsequent article in the Sunday Independent that was published during the trial.

Mr Adrian Hardiman SC, for Mr De Rossa, claimed the Minister was entitled to have the action decided at the earliest possible date, particularly as he could soon be involved in an election.

READ MORE

It would be fatal to put the trial off, especially as the original trial was aborted because of an action by the defendants, and because Mr De Rossa was entitled to vindicate his character against very serious allegations.

Independent Newspapers wants the audited and management accounts of the Workers' Party from 1969 to 1992, the minutes of ard chomhairle meetings over the same period and documents relating to three buildings used by the Workers' Party in Dublin, Cork and Meath.

It is also seeking correspondence and material relevant to links between the party and communist regimes in the former Soviet Union and Eastern bloc countries. It also wants documents relating to the existence and activities of the Official IRA and a response to media claims of links between the Workers' Party and that organisation, as well as records of all inquiries and disciplinary action and complaints against members of the party in relation to criminal or anti social behaviour, in particular in Northern Ireland.

Mr Kevin Feeney SC, for Independent Newspapers, said that as a result of evidence given by Mr De Rossa during the aborted libel trial, the existence of a large number of documents came to light.

Although Mr De Rossa gave evidence that he had burned most of them on leaving the Workers' Party to set up Democratic Left, there were documents which the party should still have in its possession. It was these the Independent was seeking.

Objecting to the application, Mr Hardiman said it was an attempt to broaden matters at issue into matters not at issue. The central matter of the libel trial was a claim, in what is known as the "Moscow Letter", that the Workers Party was involved in "special activities", that is, criminal activities, to raise funds.

This letter was purportedly signed by Mr De Rossa and Mr Sean Garland, but it had been accepted by the defence throughout the trial that it had not been signed by Mr De Rossa.

This action for discovery of documents was an attempt to blacken Mr De Rossa with irrelevant prejudicial material and if granted would further delay the re hearing of the libel trial, which was set down for February 25th.

Dr Michael Forde SC, representing three members of the Workers' Party, Mr Pat Querney, Mr Garland and Mr Tomas Mac Giolla, also objected to the application.

While his clients had no wish to take sides in the dispute between the Independent and Mr De Rossa, they were objecting because of irrelevance and because no order could be made against an unincorporated entity and therefore the Independent had, in fact, got the wrong respondent.

In relation to documents concerning the activities of the Official IRA, the party had a constitutional right against self incrimination, even assuming that such documentation existed.

The President of the High Court, Mr Justice Costello reserved his judgment to today.