Say you were to write a short news article for this paper in which you managed to insert references to all of the following: Frankenstein, bottomless wells, star chambers, panic attacks, badges of absolution and a David versus Goliath scenario. What do you think would happen? Here is what would happen. The commissioning editor would straightaway chop out most of the references as being quite without meaning. The sub-editor would get rid of the rest to save you from justified accusations of woolly writing (and thinking). The revise editor would re-jig the whole thing, between curses. The news editor would fire a rocket in your direction. The necessity for writing plain English would be impressed on you. You would be persona non grata in the newsroom for quite some time.
The only way you could justify such a story, with such a bizarre rag-bag of mixed-up references, would be if you were actually quoting somebody else. In this case, the person actually quoted was High Court Taxing Master James Flynn, who was complaining about the nature of tribunals.
So that's all right then. Well, not really. According to Master Flynn, tribunals are "the Frankenstein of modern Irish society." Presumably this means that all together, they constitute some kind of terrifying monster, out to get us. This is hardly credible. Leaving aside the rather pedantic point that the original Frankenstein, in Mary Shelley's Gothic romance, was the creator of the monster rather than the lad himself, it is difficult to imagine anyone being terrified of a tribunal in the way many of us, as children, were so deliciously scared by Boris Karloff's version of the creature.
When children think of monsters today, they are more likely to think of the creatures in the Aliens movies, or the androids and shape-changing robots of Predator and Terminator. These days, the more popular notion of Frankenstein is of a rather comical and pathetic creature. Perhaps this is a key to what Master Flynn means. Certainly, the tribunals have provided some great moments of comedy. Master Flynn also compared the workings of the tribunal to that of the star chamber - "which obtained its evidence by requiring answers to detailed interrogatories peculiarly without the assistance of juries."
Again, one doesn't wish to be pedantic, but the original medieval Court of Star Chamber was a very useful system of supplementary courts which became popular for their ability to enforce law and provide remedies when other courts were subject to corruption and influence.
Naturally, this is not the aspect to which Master Flynn is drawing our attention. In terms of tribunals, he wants us to think of what happened when the star chambers themselves were eventually corrupted, and became symbols of oppression when used by Charles I to enforce unpopular political and ecclesiastical policies.
Of course for some people, Master Flynn's historical reference will only call to mind the 1983 film, The Star Chamber, starring Michael Douglas, in which judges get together to secretly re-try defendants they believe have been unjustly freed - and then have them executed by hired assassins. Are our tribunals operating a similarly scary undercover agenda? Have you noticed that certain people who gave evidence to the tribunals haven't been seen around town lately? As for the Haughey family bill of costs with which the Taxing Master was dealing when he made his remarks, Master Flynn noted that the claim brought by the Haugheys had been defended by both the State and Moriarty tribunal lawyers: "It is, I believe, a classic David and Goliath scenario, in that the massive resources of one are pitted against the underdog."
It's a little hard and perhaps a little late to re-cast Charles Haughey in the role of the young Israelite with the slingshot, single-handedly taking on the mighty Philistine, but we must try. On second thoughts - no. Sorry. It can't be done. At least not with a straight face.
Master Flynn said in conclusion that the media would have the public believe that the existence of tribunals was a way of appeasing public disquiet, but the irony was that the public disquiet was fuelled by, and was a product of, the media.
The Taxing Master may well be correct in saying that the media create and fuel public disquiet. It's their job, after all.
bglacken@irish-times.ie