The Taoiseach showed "a lack of attention to a statutory duty" in failing to lay material concerning his former special adviser, Mr Paddy Duffy, before the Oireachtas by the time of the accepted deadline, according to the annual report of the Public Office Commission.
The commission revealed yesterday that while it had decided not to investigate the case of Mr Duffy, this "ought not be interpreted as a finding that no contravention of the Ethics Act had taken place". Indeed, the commission "took the view that Mr Duffy's actions . . . fell short of compliance" and it would "certainly have taken action" had he not resigned.
Mr Duffy resigned as a special adviser to Mr Ahern in June 1999 after it was revealed that he was listed as a director of a public affairs firm, Dillon Consultants.
That firm had advised the telecommunications group NTL on its successful bid to buy Cablelink from two State companies the previous month.
The Taoiseach only laid material concerning Mr Duffy - including his declarations of interest for 1997 and 1998 - before the Oireachtas a week after the story concerning the conflict was published. This was considerably later than the time limit of March 31st established in practice by the Minister for Finance.
All office-holders were informed of this time limit in February 1999.
Criticising Mr Ahern's failure to produce the material in time, as required, the commission remarks that "giving attention to this matter" does not place "an undue burden on any administration". Simple procedures should be introduced to make sure these requirements are adhered to in future, it says.
The decision not to launch an investigation was due to a number of factors, including the potential length and complexity of any investigation, and the fact that Mr Duffy had already resigned. However, it was clear to the commission that both the Taoiseach and Mr Duffy accepted the Ethics Act had been breached, "albeit, in Mr Duffy's view, inadvertently".
Mr Duffy did not declare his directorship of Dillon Consultants, as required, according to the commission. In addition, he "fell short of compliance" with the requirement that he declare any material interest in a matter to which his function related and that he not engage in any trade or profession, paid or unpaid, "which might reasonably be seen to be capable of interfering in, or being incompatible with, the performance of his functions as a special adviser".
The commission says it is desirable to extend the obligations of office-holders, when laying documents about special advisers before the Oireachtas, to include details of any continuing links with private-sector employment, even if unpaid.
Meanwhile, a new code of conduct for civil servants and special advisers may contain a restriction on the ability of such people to move directly to the private sector. There has been concern that people with inside knowledge of a particular government could effectively sell their knowledge to the private sector.
The code, due to be completed shortly by the Department of Finance, may contain a "cooling-off" clause providing that those leaving certain posts cannot work in a directly-related area of the private sector for a certain period.
The full text of the annual report of the Public Offices Commission is available on the home page of The Irish Times website at http://www.ireland.com/ newspaper/special/