Paper chase on Dunnes money trail

THE Dunnes payments tribunal adjourned this week amid intense speculation about whether the public will learn the contents of Mr Noel Smyth's account of his conversations with the former Taoiseach, Mr Haughey. But while Mr Haughey considers his response during the adjournment, the tribunal team will be continuing its examination of the banking transactions at the heart of Mr Ben Dunne's allegations that he gave £1.3 million to Mr Haughey.

It is clear from the evidence presented in the first week, that the tribunal team has made progress in tracing payments of £1.3 million made by Mr Ben Dunne. But the tribunal has further work to do if it is to gain conclusive evidence as to who was the beneficiary of these payments. Mr Haughey has, of course, denied that he is the beneficiary in letters to the tribunal.

Crucial now will be the extent of banking information the tribunal can uncover, either through details of accounts or the evidence of bankers.

The tribunal has already gone some way down the money trail. It started work on information supplied by Mr Dunne - most of which originally appeared in legal correspondence in late 1994. Mr Dunne was able to tell the tribunal precise details of the London bank accounts into which he was instructed to pay £1.1 million.

Crucially, the tribunal has been able to trace the money from the accounts into which the original payments were made to a bank account in Dublin. This account was in Guinness & Mahon in Dublin and was in the name of Ansbacher Limited, a Cayman Islands bank. In other words, it was an account held by one bank in another bank.

So how did the tribunal trace the money back to Dublin? In his opening statement, Mr Justice Brian McCracken said the tribunal had made a successful application to a London court to enforce the attendance of some London bankers.

However, their evidence is only being heard during the adjournment. So the tribunal must have made the initial link from Dublin.

In seeking information from the Dublin banking system, the tribunal would initially have written seeking cooperation from the relevant banks and, if this was not forthcoming, it may have issued orders seeking certain specific information. Such orders or requests would have had to be specifically related to its terms of reference to investigate payments from Dunnes Stores.

As Mr Dunne had alleged that the late accountant, Mr Des Traynor, arranged the payments, the tribunal may first have looked to Guinness & Mahon in Dublin (formerly owned by G&M in London), where Mr Traynor was chief executive until mid 1987.

Mr Traynor had let up Guinness & Mahon in the Cayman Islands along with Mr John Furze - in whose name some of the payments were made. This Cayman Islands operation was subsequently bought by Henry Ansbacher and renamed Anbsacher Limited. Mr Traynor remained as non executive director and chairman of Ansbacher Limited and Mr Furze as joint managing director.

So putting Mr Traynor's two banking connections together, the tribunal did some digging and presumably sought and received information from Guinness & Mahon in Dublin (which has since been bought by the Irish Permanent) about an account in the name of Ansbacher. This allowed them to trace Mr Dunne's £1.1 million back to Dublin.

A crucial question now is whether this money remained in Ireland or whether it went back out of the State through other bank accounts. If it stayed in Ireland, then tracing its route would be a simple enough procedure. But, given that the tribunal is spending some time investigating the matter, it is more likely that the money went back offshore again from the Ansbacher account in Guinness & Mahon, making its tracing more difficult and dependant on the co operation of international authorities.

What of the remaining £210,000, paid over, according to Mr Dunne, in three £70,000 bank drafts to Mr Haughey? The tribunal traced this to an Ansbacher Limited account in Irish Intercontinental Bank. The signatories on this account were Mr Traynor, Mr Furze and Mr John Collins. Mr Collins was the other joint managing director of Ansbacher Limited. Again, the key question will be whether this money went offshore again from IIB.

The tribunal's investigations have uncovered one other piece of information. Mr Denis McCullough, its counsel, said in his opening statement that "it would appear, on the basis of information available to the tribunal and in respect of which evidence will be given", that an overdraft of £261,000 in a current account in Guinness & Mahon in Dublin was held by Mr Haughey in May 1987 and was paid off from Guinness & Mahon in London. The date at which the overdraft was paid off was not explicitly mentioned by Mr McCullough. The precise relevance, if any, of this information to the tribunal, and how the tribunal team got access to it, is not clear.

The tribunal is looking to London and the Cayman Islands as it follows the money trail. The tribunal will no doubt be seeking information from Ansbacher Limited in the Caymans about the account in Guinness & Mahon in its name.

The tribunal is also seeking evidence of bankers from London. Managing to get London court approval to enforce witnesses from some London institutions to attend will have pleased the tribunal as again here it was depending on the co operation of the local authorities.