Mr Des O'Malley has denied altering, or approving or directing anyone else to alter, the statement of Col Michael Hefferon in the 1970 Arms Trial. Neither could he remember directing that privilege should attach to a file containing that statement.
The original statement by the head of Army Intelligence was changed after it had been seen by Mr O'Malley, who was then minister for justice, and by the Department secretary, the late Mr Peter Berry. Those elements which indicated the then minister for defence, Mr Jim Gibbons, was aware of an attempt to import arms were excised.
In the first of a four-part RTE series broadcast last night, Des O'Malley - A Public Life, Mr O'Malley failed to quell the controversy by repeating his earlier contention that he had no recollection of seeing Col Hefferon's statement.
He went on: "That does not mean to say that I didn't see it. It's quite possible that I did because this was a pretty unusual situation that the country was in at the time. I think that this statement could have been sent to Mr Peter Berry . . . he could have shown it to me but it didn't impinge on me at the time. And I certainly didn't alter it or ask anyone else to alter it."
Asked if corners had been cut in an attempt to protect Mr Gibbons, who was the chief State witness in the Arms Trial, Mr O'Malley replied that Mr Gibbons was well able to protect himself.
In relation to the parts of the Hefferon statement that had been excised, Mr O'Malley said these would have been "bits that were inadmissible in evidence" because they related to expressions of opinion and conversations.
The importance of the Hefferon statement, however, lay in its possible use for the defence. It had been taken three days after the State had arrested and charged Mr Charles Haughey, Mr Neil Blaney, Capt James Kelly, Mr John Kelly, a Belfast republican, and Mr Albert Luykx, a Belgian businessman, with conspiring to illegally import arms.
Mr O'Malley could not remember signing an order of privilege in relation to file S/7/ 70 in October, 1970, during the resumed Arms Trial. And he said it was impossible to tell what was in that file at the time, suggesting Col Hefferon's statement might not have been included.
As for the core issue of the Arms Trial, he said there had never been any question of a government-sanctioned attempt to import arms. If arms had been required, he said, the government could have imported them. The fact that it had been done surreptitiously was proof that it wasn't government policy.
He wanted a full inquiry. He didn't want an inquiry into one aspect only because it was a very complex affair and a lot of material that had not been given to the Arms Trial could now be made available. He had nothing to fear and he would be glad to co-operate. He hoped others would do so too, including the surviving defendants.
Mr O'Malley had no reason to believe Jack Lynch's reputation would be affected. When the chips were down, he said, it was Jack Lynch and himself and several other ministers who had stood in the breach to prevent the country being led towards a sectarian civil war that would have placed the earlier Civil War in shadow. That was their duty. They had done their duty.