McDowell controversy - Establishing a dangerous precedent

THE controversy surrounding Justice Minister Michael McDowell’s allegation that Frank Connolly visited Colombia on a false passport has been given a new and significant perspective by pointed criticism of the minister from a former High Court judge.

Notwithstanding the minister’s scornful dismissal of such criticism in his latest Dáil statement, the assertion by retired judge Feargus Flood that “the citizens of this country are innocent until they are proven guilty, in accordance with the rules of law” is the crux of this affair.

Hailed for his forthright tribunal report on bribery and corruption in political and business circles, the ex-judge currently chairs the Centre for Public Inquiry (CPI) headed by Connolly.

As he put it, “the minister cannot override the Constitution under any circumstances. The Constitution provides that justice shall be administered in public in court”.

Seldom given to rowing back, Mr McDowell claims he was not only within his rights but has a constitutional duty to speak out if subversives were undermining the State. In his view, the threat to democracy lay in the allegation that in the wrong hands the CPI could have undermined the State.

As he put it, the Irish people would have just cause for complaint if he remained silent. He also denied information leaked by him to a newspaper was in any sense confidential or infringed the rights of any citizen.

Clearly, however, if the minister has proof positive that Connolly went to Colombia on a false passport with a senior IRA man in 2001 as part of a plot to train Farc guerrillas, he should have that proof produced in a court of law by the DPP for the State.

While Frank Connolly’s brother was one of the Colombia Three, and Connolly himself has been less forthright on a fundamental point of contention, that does not justify the minister’s blatant bid to put the CPI executive director in the terrorist frame without proof.

By coincidence, the CPI had recently begun probing the €30 million purchase by the Department of Justice of the Thornton Hall site in Co Dublin, earmarked for a new prison complex.

Having lost the financial backing of Irish-American philanthropist Chuck Feeney directly as a result of allegations uttered under the libel-proof umbrella of Dáil privilege, the body established to investigate political issues faces imminent closure.

Holding that corruption lies at the heart of many problems facing modern society, Mr Feeney funds similar centres in Washington and Australia. It goes without saying that such institutions are anathema to governments.

While some people might not like it, Mr Connolly is entitled to his good name and reputation until proven otherwise. But there is an onus on him to say where he was on the dates in question in 2001, when Mr McDowell alleged he travelled to Colombia on a false passport.

Not surprisingly, Leaders’ Question time was dominated by this controversy as the Government circled the wagons and stoutly defended Mr McDowell.

According to Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, the minister acted properly at all times in relation to his allegations that Connolly had travelled to Colombia on a false passport.

However, the views of former judge Feargus Flood will fuel widespread public concerns, articulated by legal experts and opposition politicians, over the perceived abuse of ministerial power.

Constitutionally, the criticism levelled at the minister is perhaps even more serious than the charges facing the journalist. That a dangerous precedent has been established goes to the heart of this controversy.