Wednesday:

While probing James Gogarty on an August 1997 draft statement which was not sworn as an affidavit, John Gallagher, counsel for the tribunal, interjected points of clarification.

Garret Cooney: Why is Mr Gallagher attempting to sabotage this part of my cross-examination? Mr Justice Flood: Nobody's trying to sabotage any part of your cross-examination.

GC: It seems like it Mr Chairman.

MJF: This is a transcript prepared presumably from notes or by somebody and he [Mr Gogarty] was asked is it his - if it was changed by the time he got to swearing it. It's a matter of comment and I accept that. Isn't that the situation?

GC: Mr Chairman, I want to put this to the witness.

MJF: Will you put it to him.

GC: Please, Mr Chairman. Mr Gallagher interrupts me, Mr Callanan [counsel for Mr Gogarty] interrupts me . . .

MJF: Put it to him in the correct context.

GC: Mr Chairman, what is going on here? Are you going to give us a chance to defend ourselves in this tribunal?

MJF: That is an insulting and insolent remark from you consistent with the conduct to date by yourself in this tribunal.

GC: It's well justified Mr Chairman by the . . .

MJF: I'm adjourning this tribunal now until such time as you take care to apologise.

Burst of applause from members of the public.

Thursday:

Mr Justice Flood recounts the previous day's events and says he sees two possible ways forward: either he ignores what was said or, in the absence of an apology from Mr Cooney, bans him from the tribunal itself.

MJF: I'll rise now for 10 minutes to allow you consider the matter.

GC: Chairman, with respect, it is unnecessary to rise and I know precisely what I want to say because I've considered the matter overnight and in particular your request for an apology . . .

I remain convinced that I neither said nor did anything yesterday which warrants an apology . . . it would be both hypocritical and insincere on my part to offer the apology which you demand and I do not propose to make such an apology.

Mr Cooney then suggested the matter be referred to the Bar Council professional practices committee and indicated he would abide by its adjudication.

MJF: I have noted Mr Cooney's response to my most recent request with some regret . . . I must order that Mr Cooney's entitlement to address the tribunal on behalf of his clients is hereby withdrawn.

Yesterday:

Behind the scenes, it was agreed that Mr Cooney could make a statement at the start of proceedings.

GC: Mr Chairman . . . I accept without reservation that your motivation and objective in this, as in all other matters with which you have had to deal in this tribunal, was the efficient and just discharge of the onerous task imposed upon you by both Houses of the Oireachtas and to preserve the dignity of the tribunal.

I have never suggested nor inferred that you, the sole member of the tribunal, have been biased in carrying out your functions and it is a matter of regret that you thought to the contrary.

For my part, Mr Chairman, my only motivation and objective in anything I have said was and is to discharge the paramount duty of representing my clients to the best of my ability and experience.

It is indeed regrettable that these separate objectives should have clashed so directly and in so doing caused you personal offence. That was not my intention . . . In these circumstances, Mr Chairman, I respectfully ask that you graciously put this incident behind us and allow me to continue to represent my clients' interests.

Mr Justice Flood agreed.