Welcome to
www.moriartytribunal.com
Media Alert: “Moriarty hires firm to fight Desmond action” – Sunday Business Post, 22 August 2010
“Judge wrote to Cowen about Moriarty” – Irish Times, 9 August 2010
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0809/1224276416612.html
“Moriarty abandons plans to publish Tribunal report in two parts for now” – Irish Times, 9 August 2010
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0809/1224276416579.html
“Single report preference of Moriarty” – Sunday Tribune, 8 August 2010
http://www.tribune.ie/news/home-news/article/2010/aug/08/single-report-preference-of-moriarty/
10 More Questions for the Moriarty Tribunal
1. Has the excessive overcharging of fees by Tribunal Counsel as recently reported upon in the media been inquired into by the Chairman of the Moriarty Tribunal?
2. Has the Chairman taken any action whatsoever in relation to these media revelations concerning the conduct of certain members of his own legal team?
3. Was the Chairman of the Moriarty Tribunal informed of the meeting between his legal team and Richard Nesbitt SC and Officials from the Office of the Attorney General held at Dublin Castle on 18 October 2002, or was this crucial meeting and the matters discussed at that meeting concealed from the Chairman by his own lawyers?
4. Apart from this meeting of 18 October 2002, has any other relevant information and documentation been concealed from the Chairman of the Tribunal by members of his legal team?
5. Did the Moriarty Tribunal mislead the Department of An Taoiseach in relation to the willingness of Michael Andersen to give evidence to the Tribunal regarding the second mobile phone licence process?
6. Who advised the Moriarty Tribunal that the US$50,000 Telenor donation to Fine Gael actually fell within its Terms of Reference? Will the Tribunal disclose this legal advice?
7. How much money has the Tribunal paid to date to persons who have given evidence to the Tribunal? (i.e. before any applications for costs have properly been made)
8. Are members of the Tribunal’s legal team actively involved in writing the Tribunal’s Final Report or otherwise approving or vetting the contents of this report?
9. Apart from legal fees which are currently running in excess of €32m, how much money has the Moriarty Tribunal paid in respect of expenses for members of the Tribunal’s legal team?
10. Has the Moriarty Tribunal made any recent requests to increase the size of its legal team and/or the financial resources being made available to the Moriarty Tribunal by the Department of An Taoiseach?
Previous Media Alerts: “Moriarty gravy train must be derailed, says Fianna Fail TD” – Sunday Tribune, 1 August 2010
“Moriarty faces legal challenge over probe into telenor cheque to FG” – Sunday Tribune, 25 July 2010
“Lawyers for Moriarty claim €25m” – Sunday Times, 11 July 2010
This site has been created by Mr. Denis O’Brien to help explain and expose the inner workings of the Moriarty Tribunal of Inquiry. The Moriarty Tribunal was established in September 1997 to inquire into alleged payments to the politicians Mr. Charles J. Haughey (deceased) and Mr. Michael Lowry T.D. The Tribunal was also mandated pursuant to its Terms of Reference to inquire into acts and decisions made by both of those politicians during their respective tenures in Public Office.
Whilst the Tribunal inquired into (and reported on) several acts and decisions of the late Charles J. Haughey, it has limited itself to inquiring into a single purported act / decision of Michael Lowry. This single issue is the awarding of the second mobile phone licence to Esat Digifone Limited on 16 May 1996.
The Tribunal began its inquiries into the awarding of the second mobile phone licence in 2001. Since then, it has heard evidence from 72 witnesses spreading over 175 public sitting days and counting. Although this evidence has yet to be completed, it is understood that the Tribunal’s final report into the licence process may be published in the coming months; 9 years after it began its inquiries.
One of the many curiosities of the Moriarty Tribunal’s approach to this inquiry is that the awarding of the second mobile phone licence to Esat Digifone was not even an actual “act or decision” taken by Michael Lowry as Minister. Whilst Michael Lowry was Minister of the relevant Department at the time the licence was awarded to Esat Digifone, the unanimous evidence given to the Tribunal by all of the senior civil servants involved in the licence process (drawn from the Department of Finance and Department of Transport, Energy and Communications) was that Michael Lowry was not involved in that licence process. How then was the awarding of the second mobile phone licence “an act or decision” of Michael Lowry at all?
This site serves to focus much deserved attention on a number of areas that the Moriarty Tribunal and its team of multi-millionaire lawyers (who together have been paid in excess of €32m to date) would probably prefer were left undisturbed. However, an appreciation of these fundamental issues is absolutely critical in order to gain a full understanding of the licence process under investigation. It is also critical in order to understand how the Moriarty Tribunal and its legal team have gone about the task of inquiring into the licence process since their inquiries began way back in 2001. The word agenda springs to mind- but more of that later.
Many of the questions about the Moriarty Tribunal that remain unanswered are addressed here. For instance, why is it that the Senior Counsel leading the Tribunal’s attack on the licence process, Jerry Healy SC, was also a senior legal adviser to the Persona consortium- a disgruntled losing applicant in the second mobile phone licence competition; an entity that is presently suing the Irish State in a huge damages action arising out of the very same licence process? Was the Moriarty Tribunal’s decision to focus on the second mobile phone licence process influenced by its lead Counsel’s former involvement with Persona? Persona’s high levels of engagement with the Tribunal (and in particular its on-going contacts with Jerry Healy SC) are explored in detail at the relevant section of this site.
Despite numerous requests, the Tribunal has consistently refused to substantively address this conflict of interest involving Mr. Healy and his former clients, Persona. Some of the documents which clearly establish the nature of this unconventional relationship between the Tribunal and Persona are provided on this site so that the user can make up their own mind. They are certainly worth a look!
Another point worthy of consideration-why is it that the Tribunal has unilaterally decided that it need not make findings of fact at all, but rather that it should only be required to issue “reasonably informed expressions of opinion”? Why did the Tribunal lower the bar so dramatically for itself in terms of what it can and cannot say in its final report in respect of the licence process? What does this mean for all concerned? In fact, the implications of this particular bit of nifty footwork on the part of the Tribunal are actually very far-reaching.
On to another matter dealt with on this site: why is it that highly relevant legal advices provided to the Attorney General by leading Senior Counsel to the State, Richard Nesbitt SC, were actively concealed when those advices clearly and unequivocally approved of the issuing of the second mobile phone licence to Esat Digifone at a critical time in May 1996? Could this have anything to do with the fact that these advices completely undermine the primary allegations about the licence process being pursued so vigorously by the Tribunal since 2001?
All of these very interesting questions, and a great many more, are considered and addressed in this site. In all instances, supporting materials are provided so that the user can make up his / her mind in respect of the issues raised. This site provides links to contemporaneous documents; including documents produced by the Moriarty Tribunal itself, documents produced by various parties associated with the Tribunal as well as links to miscellaneous media articles and other relevant material. A selection of the issues being considered at present can be viewed in the navigation pane to the left hand side of this page. This website will be updated at regular intervals with plenty of further relevant and interesting material being added over the coming weeks and months.
This site aims to present the full picture such that you, the public, are not consigned to relying on the self-serving selective presentation of limited material at public sittings which has been the hallmark of the Moriarty Tribunal and its inquiries into the licence process since 2001. You can read the real story here. But don’t just take our word for it……check it out!
You’re paying for it- start judging for yourself!
