Lawyers for Burke withdraw as talks about planning immunity collapse

Lawyers representing Mr Ray Burke have withdrawn from the planning tribunal following the collapse of talks about granting the former minister for foreign affairs immunity for co-operating with the tribunal.

Mr Burke has provided the tribunal with controversial evidence about a number of matters in recent weeks. One concerns the £10,500 paid from an ICC bank account by a passport investor to a Fianna Fail account in the name of Mr Bertie Ahern and Mr Albert Reynolds in 1993.

Legal sources last night drew parallels between Mr Burke's situation and that of the former assistant Dublin city and county manager, Mr George Redmond. Mr Redmond's legal team withdrew last month, just as their client entered discussions with tribunal lawyers. This has given rise to speculation that he might become a "friendly witness" to the tribunal.

Mr Burke was told informally that he would receive immunity if he co-operated fully with the tribunal. Following this, he provided tribunal lawyers with sample evidence. However, after this apparent offer was withdrawn, it is believed Mr Burke's willingness to co-operate has diminished.

Mr Eoin McGonigal SC and Mr James McGowan, who have represented the former minister since last year, have not been seen at the tribunal since last week. Neither they nor Mr Burke's solicitor, Mr David Martin of Gore Grimes, have been in attendance this week for the first two days of Mr James Gogarty's cross-examination.

Mr McGonigal and Mr McGowan declined to comment last night on the team's absence. They referred further inquiries to Mr Burke's solicitor. However, Mr Martin is out of the State and will not be back until next week, according to a Gore Grimes representative.

Mr Redmond, when asked last week why he was not legally represented, referred to a six-figure legal bill he had received. However, legal sources insist this was not the reason why he has no legal representation at present.

The tribunal's main witness, Mr James Gogarty, sought immunity against prosecution before giving evidence. It is understood he has been granted a limited form of immunity covering allegations of criminal wrongdoing.

Notwithstanding the absence of his legal team, Mr Burke's name featured prominently in yesterday's evidence. Mr Gogarty was cross-examined on the information he provided to the media about the meeting in Mr Burke's house in June 1989, at which the politician was paid at least £30,000.

Mr Burke, in contrast to most of those who are the subject of Mr Gogarty's allegations, has not been present at the tribunal since it started.

Mr Burke has acknowledged receiving £30,000 at the meeting in his house in June 1989, and a further £30,000 from Rennicks.