Christine Newman
The Mahon tribunal yesterday rejected an application for costs of €310,515 by a promoter of Century Radio, Mr James Stafford.
Adverse findings were made against Mr Stafford in the tribunal's second interim report on the Century Radio module both relating to the issue of co-operation and on the substantive issues of corruption, the chairman, Judge Alan Mahon said in his ruling.
The chairman said on the issue of co-operation, the tribunal found that Mr Stafford obstructed and hindered the tribunal.
Findings included that Mr Stafford had failed to give a truthful account of his knowledge of the payment of £35,000 made by Mr Oliver Barry to Mr Ray Burke, then minister for communications, in 1989 and gave a false account as to how the Century figure of £375,000 for transmission charges were calculated.
"In so far as substantive issues were concerned, and while not referring to them in detail, it is clear the tribunal implicated Mr Stafford in serious acts of corruption in his dealings with Mr Burke while the latter was minister for communications," the chairman said. Mr Stafford's direct involvement alongside Mr Barry in promoting the interests of Century Radio in dealings with Mr Burke made him a crucial front-line witness for the tribunal, he said.
"Had Mr Stafford chosen to give the tribunal a truthful account of his knowledge, the tribunal's task of investigating payments to Mr Burke would have been eased and the costs which were undoubtedly incurred by Mr Stafford and others would have been reduced," the chairman stated.
A finding that any party obstructed or hindered the tribunal was a finding that the party grossly breached his or her legal obligations. It immediately called into question the entitlement of that party to recover his or her costs from the public purse.
"In Mr Stafford's case, there was a clear failure on his part to comply with his legal obligations to the tribunal in a significant manner," he said. This should not be taken as a reflection on the efforts of his legal team to co-operate with the tribunal, he said. The discretion he had to award costs was dependent on there being sufficient reasons which rendered it equitable to order the payment of such costs or a portion of them. "In Mr Stafford's case I cannot find any sufficient reasons to do so and I must therefore reject this application for costs," the chairman said.