The Court of Criminal Appeal has reserved judgment on the appeal by convicted 'Real IRA' leader Michael Mc Kevitt against his conviction for directing terrorism.
McKevitt(54), of Beech Park, Blackrock, Co Louth was jailed for twenty years by the Special Criminal Court in August 2003 after he was convicted of directing the activities of a terrorist organisation between August 29th, 1999 and October 23rd, 2000.
He was the first person to be convicted in the State for the offence which was introduced after the 'Real IRA' bomb attack in Omagh in 1998 in which 29 people died.
McKevitt also received a six years concurrent prison sentence for membership of an illegal organisation which the court said was the 'Real IRA'.
McKevitt was in court for the appeal which was also attended by his wife Bernadette Sands McKevitt.
The four-day appeal centred on the issues concerning the reliability of the chief prosecution witness in the trial — FBI agent and "supergrass" David Rupert who infiltrated the 'Real IRA' and attended Army Council meetings where Mc Kevitt was present.
Michael O'Higgins SC, for McKevitt, said in his submissions that Mr Rupert was "a deeply avaricious man" who had been paid $1.4 million by the FBI and £400,000 by the British Security Service.
He also said that Mr Rupert was a lifelong criminal who had been involved in smuggling drugs, contraband, people and explosives.
Opposing the appeal, George Birmingham SC, for the State, said Mr Rupert had performed the tasks that he had agreed to do with "remarkable skill, resourcefulness and courage".
Mr Birmingham said the decision to bring McKevitt to trial was unique in that it involved three different States, with three different law enforcement agencies, each with a commitment to the rule of law. He said the Director of Public Prosecutions had gone to elaborate lengths to ensure that McKevitt was given a fair trial.
McKevitt's lawyers appealed against conviction on the grounds that there was not full and proper disclosure of all material relating to David Rupert and that the Special Criminal Court erred in law by not adequately assessing Mr Rupert's credibility as a prosecution witness despite his history of involvement in criminality.