O' Malley not exonerated over Arms Trial, says SF man

Former minister for justice Mr Des O'Malley has not been exonerated for his actions during the 1970 Arms Trial, according to …

Former minister for justice Mr Des O'Malley has not been exonerated for his actions during the 1970 Arms Trial, according to Mr John Kelly mid-Ulster Assembly member for Sinn Féin.

Mr Kelly was one of the people charged with the alleged importation of arms in 1970 along with Capt James Kelly and the Belgian businessman Mr Albert Luykx.

Last night the Attorney General (AG) Mr Michael McDowell and the Minister of Justice Mr Donoghue published separate reports into the Arms Trial issue claiming it was unlikely any impropriety occurred.

Mr McDowell's report confirmed that before the 1970 Arms Trial the key statement of the former head of army intelligence Col Michael Hefferon was "extensively edited".

READ MORE

According to Mr Kelly, however, neither the Minister's nor the AG's report give answers as to why Mr O'Malley - the then minister for justice - signed a certificate claiming privilege over Col Hefferon's unedited statement and what was in that statement.

In the separate reports issued last night, both Mr O'Donoghue and Mr McDowell said they could not rule out the possibility that there was a conspiracy.

According to Mr O'Donoghue's report, ". . . the possibility that an attempt to suppress evidence cannot be ruled out definitively . . ." but added the likelihood was "remote".

Mr Kelly told ireland.comtoday while he was disappointed by the AG's report he was not surprised by it.

"We give a guarded notion of welcome to the Minister's report because it is at positive variance with the AG's report. The Garda report merely vindicated original claims that they didn't interfere with the original Hefferon statement."

Earlier this year, Mr Patrick MacEntee SC, a prominent barrister, said if the original statement had been produced in evidence it would have put "a totally different appropriateness on the matter. Capt Kelly, Mr Kelly and Mr Luykx would not have been charged."

However, the trial went ahead and the three men along, with Mr Charles J. Haughey, were acquitted.

"The reports do not exonerate Mr Malley," Mr Kelly said.

"They [the reports] again raise questions that Mr O'Malley has not answered and seems incapable of answeringas to who interfered with the statements.

"The gardai say they did not interfere and if they didn't the question that has to be answered is who did?"

Mr Kelly also questioned whether Mr McDowell - a prominent member of the Progressive Democrat Party - should be inquiring into the actions of one of the party's previous leaders.

"The is a whole question of the objectivity of the AG -here is man [investigating an incident], a confident; a political ally of the man [being investigated] so how can he be objective about a man on whom he may be dependent on for support, Mr Kelly said.

"I'm not a lawyer, but certainly my lawyer will be looking at it [the issue] very, very carefully to seewhat he's going to do.

"There ought to be a public inquiry - its such a sensitive and serious matter a matter that has serious implications for the institutions of state in Dublin.

Mr Des O'Malley responded to the reports last night by saying: "I welcome the reports of the Minister for Justice, the Attorney General and the Garda Commissioner in respect of questions relating to the Arms Trial."It is clear from these reports that:

  • The changes made to the Hefferon statement were properly made by members of the prosecution legal team in conjunction with the investigating gardaí. It seems that these changes were made primarily in order to comply with the rules of evidence.
  • Neither I nor Mr Berry had any involvement with such changes.
  • The claim of privilege was made on foot of legal advice and the certificates of privilege themselves were drafted in the Attorney General's office.

These three reports are perfectly compatible with my earlier statement of May 9th, 2001."