An Bord Pleanála has denied there is political interference in its planning decisions.
In a seven-page letter to Kerry County Council, the board said it was independent with "no hidden agendas", and had one of the most open appeals systems in Europe.
However, the board refused a request from councillors to send a representative to address the council on how it arrives at decisions in planning matters.
The request followed sustained criticism of the board by councillors and residents' groups in disputes over planning in Kerry.
There have been complaints by several groups, including those opposed to communications masts, that the board acts against the advice of its own inspectors.
In one such decision in September, a Meteor mast was given the go-ahead near Fenit on appeal by the company, despite the inspector's recommendation to refuse.
The mast cabin was sabotaged two weeks ago and €100,000 in damage was caused. Gardaí are investigating.
There have also been complaints by councillors and residents that the board unduly upholds refusals of one-off rural housing by Kerry County Council.
In correspondence to the council, An Bord Pleanála's chief officer, Mr P.M. Mullally, stressed the openness of the appeals system "in the context of the Irish public service".
He said the Irish model was unlike other systems in Europe in that third parties may make appeals. The proportion of such appeals was growing, with 45 per cent involving third parties.
The report added: "A notable feature of the appeal system is the present open nature of the system. The entire file on an appeal received by the board may be inspected by any member of the public for at least five years.
"There is no 'hidden agenda' in individual appeal files. In the context of the Irish public service, the appeal system is an exceptionally open system."
Mr Mullally outlined the appeals system in the report and gave a résumé of all nine board members.
"There is no political interference in decisions by the board in individual cases. Under Section 144 of the 2000 Planning Act, it is unlawful to communicate with any member of the board, an employee or a consultant engaged by the board for the purpose of influencing improperly his/her consideration of an appeal or a board decision. There are also legal obligations on members of the board, employees and consultants to declare certain interests."
In 2001 in 91 per cent of cases the board had accepted the general thrust of the inspector's recommendation.
Mr Mullally said it was not the practice of the board to attend council meetings and he had to decline the invitation to send a representative.