More than 100 newspaper articles were read to Dublin Circuit Criminal Court in support of the application by former Taoiseach Mr Charles Haughey to have his pending trial on charges of obstructing the McCracken tribunal averted.
Mr Eoin McGonigal SC, for Mr Haughey, also said his client could not get a fair trial because of comments made by the Tanaiste, Ms Harney; former Taoiseach Mr Albert Reynolds; former Fianna Fail minister Ms Maire Geoghegan-Quinn and actress Rosaleen Linehan.
Mr McGonigal read from articles from all national Irish newspapers which, he said, had prejudiced Mr Haughey's right to a fair trial.
Mr McGonigal also referred to a cover of the Phoenix satirical magazine, discussions on the Vincent Browne radio programme and two Questions and Answers programmes on RTE, as well as editorials in national newspapers.
It was the second day of the second application by Mr Haughey's legal team to halt the trial on grounds of pre-trial adverse publicity. Last December, Judge Kevin Haugh turned down the original application after a six-day hearing.
Mr Haughey was not present for the hearing. His legal team wants an order "striking out the bill of indictment" or an order "directing a permanent stay on the proceedings" or an order "postponing the trial until such time, if ever, as the unfairness created by adverse pre-trial publicity abates".
Mr McGonigal said the adverse pre-trial publicity had continued since December and had now exacerbated to such an extent that Mr Haughey could not get a fair trial. He said that at the time of December's application the potential jury in the trial would only have been aware of £1.3 million allegedly given to Mr Haughey by Mr Ben Dunne.
The report of the McCracken tribunal concluded that this money was not a bribe, he added. Mr McGonigal said that since December it has been alleged that Mr Haughey received £8.5 million from business interests. Some members of the media had assumed that this was for corrupt purposes, even though Mr Justice McCracken had clearly stated that the £1.3 million given to Mr Haughey by Mr Dunne was not intended as a bribe.
Mr McGonigal said that Ms Harney's comments that Mr Haughey should be jailed could amount to a contempt of court, based on the 1983 McArthur case in which certain comments by Mr Haughey had been published in a newspaper before a criminal trial.
He said Ms Harney's comments had not been investigated by the Director of Public Prosecutions or the Attorney General, who could have taken a contempt case. Mr Haughey had been left "by himself" and correspondence from the DPP and Attorney General to Mr Haughey's legal team did not indicate that any contempt proceedings would be taken against Ms Harney or newspapers which published her comments.
Noting that Ms Harney had said that Mr Haughey should be jailed as a result of findings at the Moriarty tribunal, he said that either Ms Harney misunderstood the work of the tribunal or else the general public, as reflected by Ms Harney, now saw the tribunals as courts of law.
The hearing continues.