Media group to consider tribunal request

Thomas Crosbie Holdings (TCH), which publishes the Sunday Business Post and the Irish Examiner, is to say tomorrow whether it will undertake not to leak confidential documents from the tribunal.

The managing director of TCH, Mr Anthony Dinan, told the tribunal yesterday he would consult with shareholders and his lawyers before making a decision.

He was giving evidence at a special hearing concerning two articles which appeared in the Sunday Business Post in October and which were based on confidential statements leaked from the tribunal.

Earlier, the tribunal heard that the journalist who wrote the articles, Mr Barry O'Kelly, had "knowingly and blatantly" destroyed the leaked documents in breach of a direction from the tribunal not to do so.

Mr O'Kelly is refusing to divulge the person(s) who gave him the information, citing the protection of "sacrosanct" journalistic sources.

However, tribunal lawyers accused him of "plagiarism" of their work and claimed it was in the public interest that the source of the leaks be identified.

The first article by Mr O'Kelly detailed property deals involving businessman Mr Jim Kennedy in Lucan, one of which was funded by beef baron Mr Larry Goodman. Public hearings into this deal at Coolamber start next week.

The second was based on a statement by Mr Jude Campion, a former employee in Mr Kennedy's amusement arcade. In it, Mr Campion names three politicians to whom he says he gave a total of £5,500 in donations.

Mr John Gallagher SC, for the tribunal, said some of the parties involved had complained bitterly about these leaks, and called for contempt proceedings to be brought against Mr O'Kelly.

Mr Eoin McCullough SC, for TCH, argued the tribunal had no jurisdiction to investigate leaks or other matters outside its terms of reference, but Judge Alan Mahon rejected this.

Asked to hand over Mr Campion's statement, Mr O'Kelly replied: "I wish no disrespect to the tribunal but I can't do that". Mr O'Kelly also refused to say who gave him the document.

Asked if he was aware of the identity of the persons who had provided the documents, he said he was.

All the documents he had been provided with, on which the two articles were based, had been destroyed, he told the tribunal. He had destroyed them on November 11th.

Asked if he had been aware at this time of the tribunal's instruction not to destroy them, he said he was. "I did so for the purpose of ensuring the protection of my sources," he said.

Judge Gerald Keys asked the witness why he hadn't retained the documents and then claimed journalistic privilege.

Mr O'Kelly said he didn't want to take that risk. His sole concern was to protect his sources and so he felt it necessary to destroy the documents.

There wasn't a lawyer in Dublin who could guarantee a 100 per cent chance of success if it came to a court case, he pointed out.

Judge Keys said that while Mr O'Kelly's lawyers assured the tribunal that no disrespect was meant, he had "knowingly and blatantly" breached the tribunal's instruction.

Mr O'Kelly said he didn't see it in terms of defiance. No disrespect was intended.

Judge Mahon asked Mr Dinan if he was prepared to give an undertaking that his newspapers would not publish confidential tribunal information.

Mr Dinan said the rights and wrongs of each individual case would be established before decisions were made. In all the newspapers owned by TCH, the individual editors exercised the prerogative on such matters.

Earlier, Mr Dinan told the tribunal he knew nothing about the leak and that he had made no investigations on being summoned to appear before the tribunal.

However, he denied choosing not to ask questions about the matter.

The chief executive of the Sunday Business Post, Mr Fiachra O'Riordan, had dealt with it, he said.

In his submissions on journalistic privilege, Mr McCullough argued that the tribunal should take "the self-denying step" of not asking Mr O'Kelly to identify his sources.