Mahon tribunal: Former Fianna Fáil TD Mr Liam Lawlor may be facing a fourth term in jail for non-co-operation with the Mahon tribunal after being accused yesterday of repeatedly lying under oath.
Mr Lawlor denied telling falsehoods in a sworn affidavit to the High Court in July 2001 in relation to his business interests in the Czech Republic.
He said he "never tried to distance" himself from a Czech-registered company called Zatecka, which earned him between €400,000 and €1 million from a property deal in September 2000.
He described as "rubbish" a claim by tribunal member Mr Gerald Keyes that he had disguised his involvement with the firm in order to avoid compliance with orders of discovery.
However, the tribunal chairman, Mr Alan Mahon, said it appeared the evidence Mr Lawlor had previously given in relation to the matter was "completely untrue".
Mr Mahon has indicated that he will decide this month whether or not to refer Mr Lawlor's case to the High Court.
The former TD has already served three terms in prison for non-co-operation.
Denying inconsistencies in his affidavit, Mr Lawlor said it referred to a 75 per cent interest which he had in the profits of the company, Zatecka.
Mr Lawlor also denied that he had lied when he said he had earned "no profits" from Zatecka, which acted as mediator in the purchase of a building in Prague by an Irish property firm, Ballymore.
Mr Des O'Neill SC, for the tribunal, noted the company earned £1 million in the transaction, three-quarters of which Mr Lawlor was entitled to.
But Mr Lawlor said it was "not necessarily my million pounds".
He said as a "guestimate", Zatecka received "maybe €400,000" in the deal, and this had to be reconciled, involving the payment of fees, expenses and tax liabilities.
"What tax liabilities are you talking about?" asked the chairman, Mr Alan Mahon, who remarked that tax was not a "big feature" for Mr Lawlor at the time.
Mr Lawlor replied that "of course" there were tax liabilities in the Czech Republic, and they would have to be met if the earnings were transferred from their current status of "loans" into income. Mr O'Neill put it to Mr Lawlor that he had been borrowing from himself.
He said the loan agreements were merely a "screen" to prevent people from inquiring into his affairs.
"Rubbish," Mr Lawlor replied. Such "Machiavellian plotting" was "wrong, totally wrong", he added.
In his affidavit, Mr Lawlor claimed that Zatecka was incorporated by an independent family trust rather than him, and that the only money received by him from activities in the Czech Republic were "nominal out-of-pocket expenses and/or fees".
Asked how he could describe a balance of over €400,000 in the company's accounts as "nominal out-of-pocket expenses", Mr Lawlor replied that that was how he described them.
He stressed, however, that he and Zatecka were "not one and the same, no matter what effort is being made here to interlink them at the hip".
If there was £10 million by way of profit in the company's account "that was not £10 million for Liam Lawlor", he said.
Mr Mahon put it to Mr Lawlor that his entire evidence to the tribunal was "non-productive", and had been so for many months. The tribunal resumes on Tuesday.
