JERRY HEALY:EFFORTS TO damage the reputation of the Moriarty tribunal's senior counsel Jerry Healy, and thereby call into question the inquiry's independence, were "opportunistic and reprehensible", the tribunal report says.
The report strongly criticises businessman Denis O’Brien for alleging that Mr Healy was in a position of “potential conflict and bias” due to work undertaken on behalf of one of the losing consortiums, which bid for the licence – Persona Digital Telephony.
“The tribunal is satisfied that Mr Healy’s conduct in this matter has been exemplary, and beyond reproach,” says the report, which accuses those co-ordinating the campaign of “misrepresenting” the limited involvement of Mr Healy with Persona.
The report says that it received correspondence from and on behalf of businessmen Denis O’Brien and Dermot Desmond contending that there was a “conflict of interest”.
The issue was pursued with “venom” in correspondence and via the internet, according to the report.
This reference in the report may refer to a website set up by Mr O’Brien, moriartytribunal.com, which claims “to help explain and expose the inner workings of the Moriarty tribunal of inquiry”.
The website refers to an “apparent serious conflict of interest” between Mr Healy’s role as senior legal adviser to the Persona consortium and his role as senior counsel for the tribunal.
The report says Mr Healy was not senior legal adviser to Persona, but was engaged by the consortium to approve an opinion which was written by a junior counsel on whether Persona should pursue judicial review proceedings when it was unsuccessful in its bid.
The tribunal was satisfied that such a “minor prior retention” of Mr Healy by Persona could not give rise to any operative conflict, or any such reasonable perception, according to the report.
In advance of public sittings, the tribunal disclosed Mr Healy’s prior retention by Persona to counsel for Michael Lowry, Mr O’Brien and Telenor and asked if they had any objections.
Counsel confirmed their clients had no objection to Mr Healy’s continuing involvement, says the report.
Mr Desmond’s counsel was not informed of Mr Healy’s role with Persona as Mr Desmond was never regarded as central to any aspect of the tribunal’s inquiries, says the report.
“The manner in which efforts have been made to damage the reputation of Mr Healy, and thereby call into question the integrity and independence of the tribunal by, firstly, misrepresenting the limited extent of Mr Healy’s prior involvement with Persona, and secondly, by concealing both the fact that disclosure of that involvement had been made, and that no objection had been taken to Mr Healy’s continuing to act as counsel for the tribunal, has been both opportunistic and reprehensible,” concludes the report.