THE leader of Democratic Left told the High Court yesterday he had concluded that a letter to the Soviet Communist Party bearing his name and published in The Irish Times four years ago was a forgery.
On the fifth day of his libel action against the Sunday Independent, Mr Proinsias De Rossa told Mr Justice McCracken and a jury that he was determined to tell anybody who asked him that the letter had nothing to do with him. He had not applied his mind to finding out who was the author of the letter.
Mr De Rossa is suing Independent Newspapers plc over an article by Eamon Dunphy in the Sunday Independent on December 13th, 1992. It is claimed the newspaper published material which associated his client with activities such as subversion, armed robbery, drugs, prostitution and protection rackets.
The defence admits publishing the words but denies they were published falsely or maliciously as alleged.
Mr Patrick MacEntee SC, for the defence, while cross examining Mr De Rossa, quoted from The Irish Times of October 26th/27th, 1992. The headlines were: "Workers' Party said to have raised funds by `special activities';" and "WP sought finance from Moscow to expand its base, files indicate".
It was stated: "The Workers' Party sought a £1 million grant in a letter to the Soviet Communist Party in 1986, according to Central Committee files released in Moscow, reports Seamus Martin. The letter and the Soviet response refusing, the funds are detailed below.
The published letter, dated September 15th, 1986, was to the secretary of the Central Committee, CPSU, and ended: "Yours fraternally, Sean Garland, general secretary; Proinsias De Rossa TD, chairperson, Executive Political Committee.
Mr De Rossa said the article first came to his attention on the day it was published, when he bought the newspaper. Mr MacEntee said it was the not the defence's case that Mr De Rossa wrote or signed the letter.
Asked if he reached any conclusions from his considering the letter or where it came from, Mr De Rossa said he had not then. Mr MacEntee: "It was a total mystery?" Mr De Rossa: "Yes."
Asked by Mr MacEntee if there was no clue at all as to whether the letter emanated from an individual in the Workers' Party, Mr De Rossa replied: "No." Asked if he made any inquiries to see whether he could bring matters any further, Mr De Rossa replied: "I was no longer a member of the Workers' Party. There was no necessity for me to make inquiries."
Mr MacEntee said the letter was extremely damaging if taken at its face value. He added: "This was a letter purporting to be signed by you to be soliciting funds from the government of the Soviet Union and revealing one of the reasons for needing the funds was the fact that the Workers' Party could no longer carry out `special activities'." He suggested the letter was potentially extremely damaging. Mr De Rossa agreed.
Mr MacEntee asked if he had consulted with other people who had been members of the Workers' Party and "seceded". Mr De Rossa said: "No, I did not." He said on reading the text of the letter, he was absolutely convinced he had nothing to do with it. He had never authorised it. "Therefore, I was satisfied the letter was a forgery," he added.
Mr MacEntee asked if in the light of the potential damage, did Mr De Rossa not even discuss the letter with his colleagues in Democratic Left who had been in the Workers' Party for the purpose of seeing who was "this maliciously disposed person trying to damage you in this way".
Mr De Rossa replied that he did not. He had studied the text in The Irish Times. Asked if he had considered the unusual spelling mistakes, Mr De Rossa said he had not. He was more concerned about the content of the letter.
Asked if he had no discussions with anybody about it, Mr De Rossa said he had issued a statement to the effect that he did not "author" it, that he had not signed it and that he would have had nothing to do with such a letter.
Mr MacEntee asked if since October 26/27th 1992, he had given the letter consideration and discussed it, Mr De Rossa said that in the context of this case he had discussed it with his lawyers.
Asked if he had made a deliberate decision that he would not discuss it, Mr De Rossa said he hag.
It was not a matter purporting to relate to him personally - it related to the alleged activity of the Workers' Party. He felt aggrieved that an attempt was being made to associate him with things that he would never in his life have had anything to do with. The contents of the letter, if taken on face value, suggested that he had been involved in "special activities".
Mr MacEntee suggested it was a letter that tarnished everybody who was in the Workers' Party when it was written and before and might have seceded with Mr De Rossa to the Democratic Left. Mr De Rossa said that was a matter for anybody else who felt aggrieved.
He was concerned his name was associated with the letter and he issued a statement saying he had no association with it.
He was not concerned about who the author was. He was concerned that he was not and had had nothing to do with it. That was his primary consideration. That was the attitude he took.
Mr MacEntee suggested that the letter was potentially extremely damaging to Democratic Left. Mr De Rossa said he considered it far more damaging to the Workers' Party. He had resigned from the Workers' Party, as had 80 per cent of the Workers Party. The Democratic Left was a new party which had nothing to do with the Workers' Party.
Mr MacEntee suggested it was also extremely damaging to anyone now in Democratic Left who had been in the Workers' Party in September 1986 or before. Mr De Rossa said he was being asked to speculate on what others thought. He was here to tell what his attitude was and how he responded.
Asked whether he had taken any steps to consult on or discuss the letter, Mr De Rossa replied: "You can ask me as often as you like and I will give you the same answer. I did not consider this to be anyone else's business."
He had not discussed it with Mr Tony Heffernan, the Democratic Left press officer. He had told him what he had wanted in the statement. Mr Heffernan typed it.
Asked if he had any discussion about the ramifications of his denial, Mr De Rossa said he was determined to tell anybody who asked that it was a forgery and it had nothing to do with him. He told Mr Heffernan to put out a statement making that absolutely clear.