THE Minister for Social Welfare, Mr De Rossa, said he did not write the "Moscow" letter, type it, author it, sign it or post it.
Continuing his cross examination, Mr Patrick MacEntee SC asked if he had ever intellectualised and applied his mind to working out how this letter came into existence.
Mr De Rossa said he was not there to intellectualise. What he had made clear at all times was that the letter was a forgery and that he had nothing to do with it.
"I didn't write it, type it, author it, sign it, post it," he said.
Mr MacEntee asked if he always thought that he had not signed it. Was there ever a stage when he thought somebody might have procured his signature by fraud?
Mr De Rossa said it was one of the things that might have happened. Mr MacEntee said that when he was thinking that way, was it based on any belief about by whom or in what circumstances the document might have been generated? Mr De Rossa: "No."
Counsel suggested that someone in 1986 might have put the letter down in front of him as part of routine post and got him to sign it. Mr De Rossa said it was a possibility.
Mr MacEntee said if that had happened, it would follow that by far the most probable place for this to happen was in Gardiner Place or in another place connected with the Workers' Party.
Mr De Rossa: "You may suggest that, I have no way of knowing if it was the case.
When Mr Justice McCracken intervened to say the defence had acknowledged that Mr De Rossa did not sign it, Mr MacEntee said he totally acknowledged it.
Mr MacEntee said he was asking the plaintiff about when he believed that he had signed it by mistake. Mr De Rossa said: "I already told you that I did not believe that." Mr MacEntee: "You never believed it?" Mr De Rossa: "I never believed it."
Mr MacEntee asked if he ever formed a view as to where the letter came from. Mr De Rossa: "No."
Mr MacEntee asked if having considered the letter, as no doubt he had with his lawyers had he any views on what organisation it was likely to have emanated from?
Mr De Rossa said what they were looking at was a press report of the text of an alleged letter in The Irish Times.
Counsel asked if he had seen the actual letter. Mr De Rossa said he had seen a photocopy but there was no way of knowing if it was a photocopy of the original letter. When asked if there were actual written signatures on it and was it on Workers' Party headed notepaper, he replied: "Apparently so."
He said he saw the top page and last page of the photocopied letter. Mr MacEntee asked if he was prepared to say if it was on Workers' Party headed notepaper used in September 1986 or was it a very ingenious forgery?
Mr De Rossa said it was a photocopy which resembled the headed notepaper of the Workers Party.
Mr MacEntee asked if he would agree that the person who wrote the letter and the author were very knowledgeable about the Workers' Party.
Mr De Rossa replied that whoever authored it gave that impression. He could only make a judgment on the basis of the text he had read in The Irish Times. The impression given was that the author was to some extent knowledgeable about the Workers' Party. Mr MacEntee asked why he, had said "to some extent".
Mr De Rossa said because it referred to activities the party wad not involved in and, as such, wad not an accurate view of the Workers' Party.
He would not agree that it was well informed. It referred to a development plan which was never discussed by any committee of the Workers' Party of which he had been a member.
Mr De Rossa agreed that a reference in the letter that close links between the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Workers' Party had been established in December 1983 was accurate.
However, the letter also referred to a common analysis and approach between the two parties but, in fact, there was a major difference, as the CPSU supported the Provisional IRA. The relationship was made more formal three years before the letter was published and there was much public comment during that period. It was also announced around the time it was established in 1983.
Mr MacEntee questioned him about peculiar spellings highlighted by the word "sic" and asked him if he had known anybody who had been in the Workers' Party who habitually misspelt things.
Mr De Rossa replied that he had more important things to do than a spell check. It meant nothing whatsoever to him. What he was concerned with was the text of an alleged letter published in The Irish Times, which alleged he had signed a letter he did not sign, and had in some way an association with activities which quite frankly would have appalled him. He was concerned that he personally was being linked in this way with so called "special activities".
Mr MacEntee asked if he would agree that whoever authored the letter and signed his name was very evil person.
Mr De Rossa said he did not know who signed it and did not know if that person was evil. He was in the court not to establish the author of the letter. He was there to establish his good name in relation to the libel against him by Eamon Dunphy in the Sunday Independent.
Mr MacEntee suggested that the person who authored the letter must, by definition, be an extremely ruthless and evil person. Mr De Rossa said that was of no concern to him.
Mr MacEntee asked why he said he was not interested in establishing who wrote the letter. Mr DeRossa replied: "Because that is the case."
Mr MacEntee asked the plaintiff where he was on September 15th, 1986.
Witness replied that he was in Moscow. He travelled to Korea in September 1986 and stopped over in Moscow for one night on the way and for two nights on the way back.
Counsel asked how many people would have known about it. Mr De Rossa replied that the political committee of the Workers' Party knew because they approved it, and staff in Aeroflot.
Mr MacEntee asked if he would consider that a person who would forge a letter, and dishonestly sign his name and include in it a reference to "special activities" was a person who should be in public life in this country.
Mr De Rossa said he had no way of knowing if the author or authors were in public life. The issue was not whether the person who did so was evil or in public life.
Mr MacEntee asked if he had sued The Irish Times for publishing the letter. Mr De Rossa said: "No, I did not."
Asked about an article in the London Independent, he said he had not sued this paper either because it had not libelled him.
The hearing continues today.