The chairman yesterday sent Mr Liam Lawlor home to reflect on his evidence to the tribunal after twice expressing "unease" about the evidence in the TD's affidavits and to the tribunal.
As the gruelling day of questioning and verbal clashes drew to a close, the chairman turned to Mr Lawlor. He first quoted an extract from the Tribunals Act, stating that anybody who gives material which he knows to be false, or by act or omission, obstructs or hinders the tribunal, or fails, neglects or refuses to comply with a tribunal order, shall be guilty of an offence.
The chairman continued to quote that a person guilty of an offence under the section shall be liable on conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding £10,000 or at the discretion of the court to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or both.
He told Mr Lawlor he wanted him to go home and consider carefully the terms of that section. Then in a clear reference to the section on penalties he had just read out, he said if Mr Lawlor did not reflect carefully on his evidence, he might be forced to take "certain decisions".
He had a "degree of unease" about the quality and frankness of Mr Lawlor's evidence to date. He would go no further than use the word "unease".
The chairman had used the word earlier in the day when he referred to the two affidavits Mr Lawlor had furnished to the tribunal. The essence of an affidavit, the chairman said, was that it should be factually correct.
"I have some unease about the truth and accuracy of the information in the affidavits," he said.
Mr Lawlor was asked about companies he had an involvement with and a consultancy, Demographic Strategic Consultants, from which he received £1,000 a month. Asked about additional income, it emerged he had two loans worth £600,000 from the Czech Republic.
In the presence of a full public gallery which at times had to be asked to keep quiet, particularly when they applauded at the end, the TD said he misinterpreted the terms of reference and he would get the documents. "Chairman, I didn't think the Czech Republic extended to your terms of reference," Mr Lawlor said.
Questions about his relationship with the Irish Consortium in the Czech Republic brought answers as blunt as: "I don't propose to address this matter" and "No, it's nothing to do with you". He agreed to contact the Prague office to obtain documentation.