Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 27 Nov 1996

Vol. 472 No. 2

Ceisteanna—Questions. - Newspaper Report on Special Criminal Court.

Michael McDowell

Ceist:

1 Mr. M. McDowell asked the asked the Taoiseach, in relation to a newspaper report (details supplied) referred to by him on 12 November 1996 in Dáil Éireann, the date on which the report was published; the newspaper in which it was published; the way in which it was drawn to the attention of the Attorney General or his office; when it was drawn to the attention of the Attorney General; the person by whom it was brought to his attention; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22694/96]

Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Mr. Carey)

The Attorney General read a newspaper reference to Judge Lynch sitting on the Special Criminal Court at the end of October 1996. No one brought the matter to his attention.

On 29 October 1996 there was a court report in The Irish Times of proceedings in the Special Criminal Court on 28 October in which Judge Lynch was mentioned. The Attorney General thinks it is likely that this was the newspaper report in which he saw the reference to Judge Lynch. The Attorney General cannot say when he may have read the report.

Mr. M. McDowell

Will the Minister of State agree that if the Attorney General read the report casually in the newspaper and it was not brought to his attention, then in all probability he read it the day the newspaper was published, 29 October? Will he explain why three days elapsed before even a letter was apparently written, which took another four days to reach its destination? Will the Minister of State agree that if the Attorney General read the report on Tuesday, 29 October he would have been aware immediately of its significance as it told him that the worst calamity he had foreseen a month earlier had taken place?

Mr. Carey

I outlined the Attorney General's position in my reply. He read a newspaper reference to Judge Lynch sitting on the Special Criminal Court at the end of October 1996 and no one brought the matter to his attention. I further stated that on 29 October there was a court report in The Irish Times of proceedings in the Special Criminal Court on 28 October in which Judge Lynch was mentioned. The Attorney General thinks it is likely that this was the newspaper report in which he saw the reference to Judge Lynch. He cannot say when he may have read the report.

Mr. M. McDowell

With all due respect, the Minister of State has given an evasive reply. If the Attorney General, who is an intelligent and bright man, read in the newspaper that Judge Lynch was presiding in the Special Criminal Court and knew two months previously that he had been removed as a judge of that court then it must immediately have impacted on him that a disaster was at hand and that his worst fears had come to pass. It is not good enough for the Minister of State to say that the Attorney General does not know when he read the report. Surely it is engraved in his memory when the disaster became apparent to him. Anyone in his position would have lifted the phone and asked if the newspaper report was true and attempted to establish the facts. Will the Minister of State agree it is totally unacceptable for him to say that the Attorney General does not recollect when this first came to his attention, bearing in mind that if he read the report on the day it was published he allowed three days to elapse before he wrote a letter? He did not send that letter by courier——

An Ceann Comhairle

The question is over long. There is too much elaboration and repetition.

Mr. M. McDowell

I am entitled to a fair answer to a fair question.

An Ceann Comhairle

I have no control over such matters.

Mr. M. McDowell

The Minister of State has offered no explanation as to why a week elapsed——

An Ceann Comhairle

This ought not to lead to argument. Let us hear the Minister of State's reply.

Mr. Carey

Deputies who tabled questions to the Taoiseach for answer this week were informed by his office that he would not be available to answer them. If Deputy McDowell wishes to resubmit his question to the Taoiseach he is entitled to do so.

Mr. M. McDowell

I accept that offer.

Mr. Carey

The Attorney General was not sure about the veracity of the newspaper report. As the Taoiseach informed the Dáil on 12 November, the Attorney General wrote to the Minister for Justice on 1 November arising from the report. The Attorney General is not attempting to slide out of anything; he has been upfront about the matter.

Mr. D. Ahern

Did the Attorney General speak to anyone in his office immediately after he read the report? Did he instruct anyone in his office to investigate the veracity of the report and to contact the Minister for Justice and the registrar of the Special Criminal Court to find out the position? Is the Attorney General on the mailing list for Iris Oifigiúil?

An Ceann Comhairle

These matters are worthy of separate questions.

Mr. Carey

While I have some knowledge of the matter and good briefing material, I cannot answer all the Deputy's questions. The Attorney General was uncertain about the position after he read the newspaper report and he wrote to the Department of Justice on 1 November. There is no great difficulty about the matter, which has been fully explained by the Taoiseach. If Members wish to resubmit their questions to the Taoiseach then they are perfectly entitled to do so. The matter has been debated ad nauseam and I do not see where this further debate is leading.

Mr. D. Ahern

Given his admission that he cannot answer the questions put by Deputy McDowell and me, will the Minister of State accept that it would be preferable for us to put them directly to the Attorney General at a committee meeting so that we can find out what exactly what went on in his office?

An Ceann Comhairle

We are having an extension of the subject matter by way of reference to committees.

Mr. D. Ahern

I deserve an answer to my question.

Mr. M. McDowell

The Minister of State said in reply to Deputy Ahern that the Attorney General did not know whether the report was true, he did nothing for a number of days, he did not ask anyone to investigate the report to see if it was true and he did not ask anyone in his office to contact the registrar of the Special Criminal Court or the Department of Justice. Does the Minister of State want to convey to the House the meaning that nothing was done to check the Attorney General's doubts at the time?

Mr. Carey

The Attorney General wrote to the Minister for Justice. The information known to him at that stage raised doubts rather than obvious implications. The Attorney General acted properly in the matter.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am not going to dwell unduly long on this question. There are many other questions on the Order Paper and I will be moving to them shortly.

Mr. O'Donoghue

Can the Minister of State shed any light on why the Attorney General in his letter to the Minister for Justice on 1 November set out advice on the consequences of the improper composition of the Special Criminal Court? Why did he think it necessary to include advice in that letter? Did the Attorney General contact the Chief State Solicitor's office after he read the report referred to in Deputy McDowell's question?

Mr. Carey

The Attorney General wrote to the Minister for Justice on the basis of the information known to him, which at that stage raised doubts rather than obvious implications. If the letter explained the consequences of his doubts——

Mr. D. Ahern

A newly qualified solicitor would have known about it.

Mr. Carey

That is fair comment, I will not dispute that.

Mr. D. Ahern

I am glad the Minister of State admits that.

Mr. Carey

Deputy McDowell was also offered this facility. Deputies Bertie Ahern and Harney withdrew their questions. If the Deputy wants to get more extensive answers, he should table the question to the Taoiseach. This matter has been debated at length and all the answers have been given.

Mrs. O'Rourke

They have not.

Mr. Carey

Nothing has been left untold.

Mr. M. McDowell

On a point of order, since the Minister of State courteously suggested I should table the question directly to the Taoiseach, I would be happy to withdraw it and retable it to the Taoiseach next week.

Mr. Carey

I do not know if the Deputy can do that now.

Mr. M. McDowell

Did the Minister of State not make that offer?

An Ceann Comhairle

I will not give a commitment in the matter. As I have said on many occasions, if Members are dissatisfied with Ministers' replies, they have a remedy. My office will consider the matter, if the question is posed along those lines.

Mr. M. McDowell

Obviously the Minister of State has been given only limited information to deal with this question and I accept he is doing his best to be helpful to the House, but he invited me not to pursue the matter now on the basis that I can pursue it with the Taoiseach later. I would be happy to do that, but the Taoiseach might not be as generous as the Minister of State and might ask the Chair to disallow my question on the basis that it was a repeat.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair rules on matters which are directly before it, not on hypotheses.

Mr. R. Burke

I accept it is not up to you, Sir, to ensure that Ministers answer adequately. As the Minister of State said he cannot answer all the Deputies' questions and suggested that they should be tabled again next week, there is a reasonable case for acceding to Deputy McDowell's request to defer his question until next week when the Taoiseach can respond. On behalf of this side of the House, I appeal for a clear indication that this question can be tabled next week and that all similar questions will not be ruled out of order.

An Ceann Comhairle

On that basis I will proceed to Question No. 2.