THE MAHON tribunal is entitled to make findings of fact under the civil standard of proof, rather than the higher criminal standard, in relation to proceedings affecting the late Liam Lawlor TD and his widow, counsel for the tribunal argued before the High Court yesterday.
Denis McDonald SC said the tribunal operated under the civil standard of proof because it had no power to impose a penalty, notwithstanding any findings of a criminal nature it might make.
Mr McDonald was making submissions on the third day of the hearing of Hazel Lawlor’s proceedings against the tribunal in which she wants a number of declarations, including that the tribunal cannot make findings of serious misconduct against herself or her late husband unless supported by the criminal standard of proof.
The criminal standard requires that allegations be proven “beyond reasonable doubt”, while the civil standard of proof rests on the “balance of probabilities.”
Mrs Lawlor, Somerton House, Lucan, Co Dublin, is also seeking orders directing the tribunal to make all necessary financial arrangements to enable her to engage effective legal representation for herself during proceedings before the tribunal.
She contends that failure to provide such arrangements violates her rights to fair procedures and to vindicate the good names of herself, her husband and family.
Mrs Lawlor is a witness in the Quarryvale II module of the tribunal and she was granted limited representation by its chairman, Judge Alan Mahon, in November 2005. Her involvement is limited to providing evidence to the tribunal in relation to lodgements made to her personal accounts between 1991 and 1995.
The court has heard that the estate of Mr Lawlor, who died in a car crash in Moscow in October 2005, potentially faces a legal bill of €600,000 arising out of separate contempt proceedings brought by the tribunal against him for failing to comply with orders of discovery.
Mrs Lawlor’s lawyers say she has real concerns about her home over that €600,000 bill which has yet to be adjudicated on.
In submissions earlier yesterday, Martin Giblin SC, for Mrs Lawlor, said her health had suffered as a result of the events surrounding the tribunal, the death of her husband and the “appalling publicity” unrelated to the tribunal which followed that death.
Mr Giblin added that her husband was no longer here to help her comment on material being put to her by the tribunal.
The hearing before Mr Justice Roderick Murphy continues.