The Criminal Assets Bureau (CAB) was not entitled to refuse to hand over to the Flood tribunal copies of documents seized from the former assistant Dublin county manager, Mr George Redmond, the Supreme Court ruled yesterday.
The Chief Justice, Mr Justice Hamilton, giving the judgment of the court, found the High Court had decided correctly that Mr Justice Flood had power to decide whether the documents in CAB's possession were privileged and whether copies should be handed over.
The documents were seized by CAB after Mr Redmond was arrested at Dublin Airport last February. CAB agents took cheques and documents and later seized further material in Mr Redmond's home.
The tribunal solicitor asked CAB to supply copies of all the documents seized. The bureau refused, and in April the tribunal sent a summons directing the head of CAB, Chief Supt Fachtna Murphy, to appear before it and to produce copies.
Supt Murphy said he could not hand them over because it might prejudice CAB's investigations. He would not answer any more questions and claimed privilege.
The bureau's lawyers argued that Mr Justice Flood had no jurisdiction to rule on the question of privilege. The tribunal chairman disagreed, and the matter came before the High Court, where Mr Justice McCracken held the tribunal had power to decide whether the documents were privileged.
CAB appealed to the Supreme Court and lost that appeal yesterday.
Mr Justice Hamilton said any person required by the tribunal to produce documents in his possession or procurement might claim some or all were privileged.
Where such a claim was made in the High Court it had to be decided by the court, which might find it necessary to examine the documents in question.
It was beyond argument that the provisions of the Tribunal of Inquiry (Evidence) (Amendment) Act, 1979, similarly empowered Mr Justice Flood to adjudicate on any claim of privilege so made to him.
CAB was in no different position from any other person or body lawfully required to attend before the tribunal or produce documents in their possession or procurement, the Chief Justice said.
Any infringement of fair procedures or constitutional rights might be corrected in judicial review proceedings in the High Court.
The Supreme Court said it was hardly appropriate for CAB to describe Mr Justice Flood as being in "dispute" with the bureau. The tribunal chairman had exercised powers vested in him by the Oireachtas. CAB had sought to resist the exercise of the powers on the grounds of privilege.
The decision as to whether such a claim was well founded was not in any sense the resolution of a "dispute" between the tribunal and any other party, and the same could be said of many other rulings which a tribunal of this nature might be required to make in the course of its lengthy proceedings.