Gilmartin a ‘malevolent and mendacious’ witness

TAOISEACH Bertie Ahern’s lawyer yesterday launched a scathing attack on the Mahon Planning Tribunal and called the chief witness, developer Tom Gilmartin, a “puppet” for others to inflict political damage on his client.

Conor Maguire SC, for Mr Ahern, termed Mr Gilmartin a “malevolent and mendacious” witness who was using the tribunal to carry out a personal vendetta against Cork-based businessman Owen O’Callaghan.

The tribunal is investigating Mr Gilmartin’s claims that Mr O’Callaghan told him he paid Mr Ahern £80,000 to block tax designation for a rival west Dublin shopping complex in the 1990s.

Mr Gilmartin is due to begin his evidence today and it is expected to last a number of weeks.

Mr Maguire also rounded on the tribunal’s timing of its inquiry into the Quarryvale 11 module. It had gone ahead despite the imminent General Election and circulated sensitive information regarding Mr Ahern to third parties — knowing it would end up in the media.

Mr Maguire said the tribunal’s action — despite being warned — in rushing into public hearings ran the risk of interfering with the democratic process.

He said the malicious and false allegations by Mr Gilmartin were part of a pattern that had been made against Mr Ahern over the past seven years.

Tribunal chairman Judge Alan Mahon said Mr Maguire had made comments that amounted to accusations of bias and improper conduct by the tribunal. “Needless to say, these are categorically rejected,” he added.

Earlier, in a detailed opening statement, the tribunal claimed Mr Ahern’s explanations for sums of money lodged for his benefit did not square with bank records it had uncovered.

Flatly rejecting the tribunal’s interpretation of what it has uncovered relating to Mr Ahern’s finances, Mr Maguire said no evidence had come from the banks to support the tribunal’s fanciful suggestions.

Rounding on the chief witness, Mr Maguire said Mr Gilmartin’s credibility was already in shreds and his previous evidence, which he had changed significantly, was found to be untrue.

He said the tribunal was failing to investigate “concerted attempts” to damage the Taoiseach’s good name and said the examination of Mr Ahern’s financial affairs now “seems to be an end in itself”.

Mr Maguire said false and malicious allegations were being used by third parties, including developer Tom Gilmartin, to inflict political damage on Mr Ahern.

One of the discrepancies the tribunal put under the spotlight yesterday relates to a Stg £30,000 bank lodgement Mr Ahern claims to have made in the mid-1990s. A tribunal check of bank foreign exchange transactions showed no such large sterling lodgement was made that day.

Tribunal lawyer Des O’Neill SC said a customer presenting $45,000 for exchange into Irish currency on that date — December 5, 1994 — would have received £28,772.90.

This is the amount that was lodged to an account for Mr Ahern’s benefit on that date.

Mr O’Neill observed: “Mr Ahern states that he was not involved in any substantial dollar transaction.”

Five substantial cash lodgements were initially queried by the tribunal. Amounting to £116,481, they related to accounts in Mr Ahern’s name and to one bank account in the names of his daughters.

Mr O’Neill explained the tribunal sought the details because the amounts were substantial in the context of Mr Ahern’s known income and because no records were available to the tribunal showing the source of these funds.

According to Mr Ahern, the December 1994 money — lodged to the account of his former partner Celia Larkin — came from Stg £30,000 in cash given to him by Manchester-based businessman Michael Wall.

The Taoiseach said it was for structural work on the house he now owns in Beresford Avenue, Drumcondra, which he was then renting from Mr Wall.

Mr O’Neill SC said the £28,777 lodged in December 1994 did not equate with the recorded sterling transactions that day — the total of which amounted to less than £2,000. There were, however, a transaction or transactions in other non-sterling currencies that day which would equate a payment of $45,000.

Another transaction said to have been a re-lodgement of savings by Mr Ahern was now discovered to have been the result of a sterling transaction, while another lodgement did not back up Mr Ahern’s claim that he received Stg £8,000 from Manchester businessman Michael Wall.

Mr O’Neill also said there was very little documentary evidence to support Mr Ahern’s explanations about the source of the five lodgements totalling over £116,000. However, Mr Ahern’s lawyer Conor Maguire SC disputed the tribunal’s interpretation and said there was no documentary evidence for the tribunal’s suggestions relating to the sterling lodgement.