The impresario and Century Radio promoter, Mr Oliver Barry, was refused his application for the State to pay his legal bill of €611,000 yesterday at the Mahon tribunal.
Mr Barry gave evidence in the Century Radio module of the tribunal, which found that a payment of £35,000 (€44,440) he made to Mr Ray Burke, then minister for communications, in May 1989 was intended as a bribe.
The chairman, Judge Alan Mahon, said yesterday Mr Barry's non-co-operation with the tribunal was a major feature of his evidence and overshadowed almost all of it.
"Mr Barry's evidence and the information furnished by him to the tribunal were clearly designed to mislead the tribunal," he said.
Mr Barry had submitted a costs bill in the region of €611,000. He was represented by two firms of solicitors on different occasions and by a number of junior and senior counsel, the chairman said.
Mr Barry's solicitors engaged in extensive correspondence with the tribunal and four orders for discovery were made between 1999 and 2001.
Judge Mahon said it was clear that Mr Barry was a crucial witness in the Century Radio module and the investigation of monies paid to Mr Burke.
The focus of the inquiries with which Mr Barry was concerned centred on the £35,000 payment, he said.
In the tribunal's second interim report, Mr Barry was found to have obstructed and hindered the tribunal, including his failure to provide a truthful account as to why he had paid Mr Burke the money.
"The non-co-operation findings against Mr Barry are extensive, significant and serious," he said.
The tribunal concluded Mr Barry had made a corrupt payment of €35,000 to Mr Burke for the purposes of ensuring that Mr Burke acted to serve the interests of the promoters of Century Radio in his capacity as minister for communications, the chairman stated.
"Although Mr Barry allegedly admitted the payment of £35,000 to Mr Burke and while more often than not the tribunal preferred Mr Barry's account of matters to that of Mr Burke, the tribunal found Mr Barry not to have given truthful evidence," he said.
Most importantly, the tribunal rejected Mr Barry's contention as to the most crucial issue, namely the reason for the payment.
Mr Barry contended the payment was a legitimate political donation but the tribunal found it was a bribe and was intended to ensure that Mr Burke would as minister assist the private interests of Mr Barry and his fellow promoters.
Judge Mahon said: "It was open to Mr Barry to provide the tribunal with a truthful and accurate account of the true reason for the payment. Had he done so, the tribunal, while concluding the payment to be a bribe would, I believe, have exonerated him on the issue of co-operation. This in turn would place me in a position where I could seriously consider allowing him, at least, a substantial portion of his costs."
He said he had considered the correspondence between Mr Barry's solicitors and the tribunal, and transcripts of evidence, to ascertain if there were significant instances of co-operation on key issues arising in the module as would entitle Mr Barry to some of his costs.
Unfortunately such instances as there were did not take from the fact of Mr Barry's non-co-operation with the tribunal, Judge Mahon said.