The Arms Crisis

Sir, - John Bowman's comments on the arms trial (The Irish Times, January 15th) are based on the absolutely false premise that…

Sir, - John Bowman's comments on the arms trial (The Irish Times, January 15th) are based on the absolutely false premise that it had to do with "Haughey's remit". On the contrary, the trial was based on the remit of Mr Gibbons, the Minister for Defence. He was the statutory authority for the proposed importation and the basic question was whether he authorised the operation.

My defence was based squarely on my belief and knowledge that Mr Gibbons had authorised the importation. This was the core of the defence under which the four defendants, including Mr Haughey, were found not guilty. As regards the "Haughey's remit", it only became an issue at the subsequent Committee for Public accounts inquiry into the money that bought the arms. It is the desire not to impinge further on your space, that prevents me going into detail on this, but I suggest to Mr Bowman that to clarify matters further, he should read my recent book The Thimbleriggers, which deals with both the arms trials and the committee of inquiry. It is available at several bookshops throughout the country, which are not part of the Eason distribution chain. - Yours, etc., (Capt) James J. Kelly,

Curzon Street, Dublin 8.