Cosgrave fails to stop inquiry into Dunlop's claims

The former Fine Gael senator, Mr Liam Cosgrave, has failed in his attempt to halt the Flood tribunal's investigations into corruption allegations made by the lobbyist Mr Frank Dunlop.

Rejecting Mr Cosgrave's challenge, the tribunal ruled yesterday that the cross-examination of Mr Dunlop should go ahead. It also rejected his demand for access to confidential tribunal information on Mr Dunlop.

Mr Cosgrave is not expected to appeal the tribunal's ruling to the High Court. His lawyers last week called on the tribunal to cease its inquiries, arguing that it had failed to adequately investigate the reasons why Mr Dunlop had lied when he first appeared at the tribunal in April 2000.

Mr Michael O'Higgins SC, for Mr Cosgrave, also demanded to see the records of private meetings between tribunal lawyers and Mr Dunlop, as well as statements made by Mr Dunlop in relation to other modules of investigation.

These could contain material which would undermine Mr Dunlop's credibility, Mr O'Higgins argued. However, the tribunal said yesterday it was "satisfied that Mr Cosgrave has been and will be given every opportunity to defend his good name". Insofar as Mr Cosgrave had a perception that Mr Dunlop's credibility had not been tested, his legal team would be afforded "all reasonable latitude" in cross-examination.

"We have no doubt that the cross-examination by Mr O'Higgins and by other interested parties will be vigorous in the extreme. The various parties cross-examining Mr Dunlop do so with the benefit/or advantage of the knowledge that he has lied under oath and has admitted doing so," said Mr Justice Flood.

The chairman said Mr Dunlop's credibility "is and remains a core issue in this inquiry". The tribunal would take due notice that his credibility was "tainted" by reason of his admissions and would treat his evidence "with the greatest of caution" for this reason.

Regarding Mr O'Higgins's demand for access to confidential information relating to Mr Dunlop, Mr Justice Flood said it was "unworkable, unreasonable and unfair" to expect that the tribunal release "as of right" every piece of documentation relating to any witness. The chairman said the matter had been covered by earlier rulings of the tribunal.

Because of the massive volume of work relating to allegations of planning corruption, it was absolutely essential that the tribunal proceeded in specifically designed modules.

To release information relating to other modules would be a "wholly improper" use of such information and "grossly damaging" to the constitutional rights of individuals.

"While the system currently operated by the tribunal in relation to statements may not be perfect, we are satisfied that it is the fairest to those involved and the only practical way to proceed."

The tribunal was not in a position to give an assurance to Mr O'Higgins that there is nothing in documentation not yet released which relates to Mr Dunlop's credibility.

If the evidence showed that Mr Dunlop had altered his evidence to improve his position in relation to the Revenue Commissioners or the DPP, the tribunal would make the appropriate findings "in due course".