Haughey side may call Tanaiste in its case to have trial prohibited

The Tanaiste, Ms Harney, may be called to give evidence in an application by former Taoiseach Mr Charles J

The Tanaiste, Ms Harney, may be called to give evidence in an application by former Taoiseach Mr Charles J. Haughey to have his trial for obstructing the McCracken tribunal prohibited.

Recent comments by Ms Harney that he should be "convicted and imprisoned" were among the grounds cited by lawyers for Mr Haughey in a motion calling for the prohibition of the trial, which was opened before Judge Kevin Haugh at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court.

Mr Eoin McGonigal SC noted "phenomenal hostile publicity" which had arisen from the recent £8.5 million claim in relation to Mr Haughey when he submitted the motion listing eight grounds for the application.

He said there was a possibility that discovery as well as oral evidence might be required and that parties, including "the public person" who made the recent comments, RTE and the Director of Public Prosecutions might have to be put on notice for the hearing.

READ MORE

The motion calls for an order to be made "striking out the bill of indictment", or as alternatives 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".

Judge Haugh will begin hearing the application on June 20th. Mr McGonigal said the recent ruling by a divisional court of the High Court in relation to the empanelling of a jury for the trial had led to even more adverse publicity, which had "caused a public figure" to make statements impinging on his client's right to a fair trial.

Mr McGonigal Eamon Leahy SC) said there would be a significant number of exhibits, including video and audio tapes of programmes on RTE.

Mr Maurice Gaffney SC, prosecuting, said his instructions were to ask for the earliest possible trial date.

The first set of grounds listed in the motion seeking prohibition of the trial come under the general heading of "State oppression" and include Ms Harney's original comments as first reported in the Irish Independent and her further comments on the RTE news last Monday.

The motion lists the decisions by the Moriarty tribunal to call evidence directly related to a matter in issue in the proposed trial and "to call evidence prejudicial to the defendant and injurious to his prospect of obtaining a fair trial".

Also under the heading of "State oppression", the motion cites "repeatedly unfair coverage which has been broadcast by the State broadcasting corporation, RTE".

Mr McGonigal said the Five Seven Live radio show broadcast a feature entitled "Who wants to be a millionaire?", which included music from a popular foreign programme and a deliberate distortion of Mr Haughey's voice "calculated to prejudice his right to a fair trial".

The motion further cited what it called "repeated insistence" by the presenter of Questions and Answers that Mr Haughey had obstructed the McCracken tribunal, which was "the precise subject matter of the charges" he faced before the court.

The motion also claims that both the Attorney General and Director of Public Prosecutions had failed to take any, or any adequate step, to vindicate Mr Haughey's right to a fair trial under the Constitution and Articles 6, 8 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Mr McGonigal said that at present, the Moriarty tribunal was interfacing itself with the trial.

Mr Haughey had been most anxious to have the criminal matter disposed of before meeting the tribunal but every time the tribunal sat, it created adverse publicity in relation to him.

Mr McGonigal submitted that as between the trial and the tribunal, the trial must come first as a superior constitutional right. The defence had written to the tribunal on May 17th inviting it to postpone its dealings with Mr Haughey until after his trial.

It had written again on May 23rd and May 30th noting the adverse publicity being created against Mr Haughey.