Lawlor named as man who sought #5m, tribunal told

Mahon TribunalDeveloper Mr Tom Gilmartin identified Mr Liam Lawlor in 1989 as the man who sought a £5 million bribe from him, according to Dublin's top local authority official at the time.

The former Dublin city and county manager Mr Frank Feely yesterday stood over the notes he took when Mr Gilmartin recounted his allegations in February 1989, saying it was "highly unlikely" they contained any errors.

In his evidence to the tribunal last March, Mr Gilmartin denied identifying Mr Lawlor as the person in the £5 million extortion allegation. He said he didn't know the identity of the man he claims made the demand in a corridor of Leinster House.

However, Mr Feely yesterday insisted his notes, which he said were prepared within 24 hours of the meeting with Mr Gilmartin, were correct. He recorded what he understood the developer to have said about Mr Lawlor.

The chairman, Judge Alan Mahon, said there were "significant discrepancies" between the notes and Mr Gilmartin's account of the meeting. Tribunal lawyers questioned Mr Feely about eight separate areas of difference.

According to Mr Gilmartin, he told Mr Feely at the meeting that Mr Lawlor looked for £200,000 for himself and George Redmond in return for their assistance. He also claimed Redmond gave him a map of land ownership in west Dublin and spoke about an aborted meeting with the official a few days earlier.

However, Mr Feely said he was told none of this. If he had, he would have recorded it. Mr Feely's notes record Mr Gilmartin as saying he would "see George Redmond alright if planning came through". However, Mr Gilmartin has denied saying this.

Asked about this, Mr Feely replied: "quod scripsi scripsi" (what I have written, I have written). Mr Gilmartin probably realised he had made serious allegations about Redmond and wanted to say something good about the man, he said.

According to Mr Feely, because of the seriousness of Mr Gilmartin's allegations he didn't have them typed up. He didn't want anything going into the computer system and he used only initials to describe the people involved. He didn't create a file for the notes but brought them home.

He felt he had a duty to protect Mr Gilmartin, who could be sued for his allegations, as well as others mentioned, including Mr Lawlor, Redmond and Cllr Finbarr Hanrahan.

Mr Feely said he gave a copy of the notes to the gardaí at a meeting on March 6th, although the Garda report says only that he read extracts from the notes at the meeting. He acknowledged the notes were not contemporaneous, saying he wanted Mr Gilmartin to talk freely at their meeting. If he had taken notes, it could have affected Mr Gilmartin's flow. However, he did note down the salient points.

Mr Feely said he was contacted on February 23rd by his colleague Mr Seán Haughey, who told him about Mr Gilmartin's allegations, adding: "It is not good for George."

Mr Feely said he wanted to hear the allegations first-hand, and a three-hour meeting between the officials and Mr Gilmartin took place the following day.

It was "highly unlikely" there were any errors in the notes he had taken of this meeting, he told Ms Patricia Dillon SC, for the tribunal. He regarded the matter as serious so he wouldn't have put in anything he wasn't happy with. He had put a lot of care and attention into the notes.

Asked why the notes were dated February 28th, when the meeting with Mr Gilmartin had taken place four days earlier, he said he wanted Mr Haughey, who had also attended the meeting, to counter-sign the notes. This had taken until after the weekend.