Flood notes Lawlor's failure to co-operate again

For a while yesterday morning it looked as if the threat of an order of imprisonment might arise at the tribunal again

For a while yesterday morning it looked as if the threat of an order of imprisonment might arise at the tribunal again. Mr Liam Lawlor refused to answer questions about buildings or lands he had been associated with in the Czech Republic.

Mr Lawlor's lawyer again objected to the tribunal's line of questioning, claiming it was not relevant to the inquiry's terms of reference.

The chairman ruled it was relevant, however, and Mr Lawlor indicated that he would be seeking a High Court judicial review relating to that specific aspect. He refused to answer the question put several times by tribunal lawyer, Mr John Gallagher.

Ominously then, Mr Gallagher reminded the TD of the provisions in the legislation which deal with the refusal or failure to answer questions and the consequences which could arise.

READ MORE

Mr Justice Flood dealt with it quietly, saying he would take no action at the moment but would note the failure to co-operate with the tribunal.

He stressed that the question remained outstanding and was not to be abandoned or withdrawn.

The confrontation with the tribunal came at the beginning of a day in which the Dublin West TD was questioned painstakingly about his business interests.

The process eventually elicited information not revealed to the tribunal previously, the existence of two consultancies Mr Lawlor was associated with.

Mr Lawlor was asked about invoicing PR consultant Mr Frank Dunlop in the mid-1990s for £38,000 for consultancy services, for advice on setting up a PR company in Prague.

This, he said, was invoiced through a consultancy called Long Associates with an address in "Downtown London", as he put it yesterday.

Mr Gallagher said he had never disclosed this to the tribunal. "I'm disclosing it now," Mr Lawlor told him.

Asked what he did with the cheque for £38,000, Mr Lawlor said he thought he might have been cashed by a local publican, Mr Pat Murphy of Sarsfields in Inchicore.

Much to the amusement of the packed public gallery, Mr Lawlor described how he thought he would not have been given the whole amount at once, just perhaps £5,000 or £10,000 here and there over time.

When he was asked about any other consultancies, Mr Lawlor told the tribunal about Industrial Consultants of Abbey Street, which he said he set up to provide advice on cold storage in Nigeria.

Mr Gallagher put it to him that he had issued two "fake invoices" to the late Mr Tom Roche in the name of the company.

Unfazed, Mr Lawlor said the invoices were made out to National Toll Roads for Mr Roche, who asked for them for his accounts after he gave a political donation.

In the afternoon the evidence turned to a list of companies Mr Lawlor provided to the tribunal, with which he had been associated since the 1960s.

The questioning centred on Advanced Proteins Ltd, which Mr Lawlor said had never traded but as the tribunal showed had £900,000 lodged into it.

Another seven company names are listed. As Mr Lawlor begins his fourth day in the witness box today, the tribunal is expected to question him on them, seeking more documents and information as it goes.