The Minister for Justice has strongly defended his role in the Molloy controversy.

Mr O'Donoghue said that the officials in his Department were blameless. "I have stated repeatedly that if the officials acted in good faith, and were blameless, then you can hardly ascribe blame or lack of good faith to me. It is not possible to do so," he said.

Mr Jim Higgins (FG, Mayo) suggested that the trawl through the correspondence in the Department of Justice was a smokescreen.

He asked Mr O'Donoghue if he stood over the contention that there was absolutely nothing wrong with Mr Molloy making representations "to seek the release of an individual who raped and buggered his daughter, threatened to tie her with a rope and throw her in a lake?"

Rejecting the assertion, Mr O'Donoghue said the Department of Justice was vast and dealt with extremely complex and sensitive issues. There were divisions dealing with prisons, courts and crime.

"There were three separate pieces of correspondence in each of the divisions, and there was nothing whatsoever that I can see to be hidden," he said.

"In this regard, I should also put on the record of the House that there was no personal contact between Deputy Molloy and myself relating to this case, either before, during or after the statements in court by Mr Justice O'Sullivan."

Mr O'Donoghue said he received over 12,000 representations annually from members of the public and the Oireachtas, from TDs of all parties, senators of all parties, Ministers of State and other Ministers.

"These representations are formally acknowledged by staff in my office and passed on to the relevant sections in my Department for attention and for the preparation of replies.

"Replies are signed by me, or on my behalf, but rarely would I have time personally to study the detail of such representations or replies given the overall volume involved.

"I challenge any member of the parties opposite who has had the privilege of serving as a minister to stage categorically that they read all correspondence coming into their office and each and every reply, including each and every acknowledgment emanating from their office.

"Those who have served as ministers know that that is not the case. If they were to do this, they would have precious little time for the discharge of their fuller functions as ministers relating to the business of their Departments and their responsibilities to the Oireachtas.

"Some commentators outside of this House have sought to argue that it is inconceivable that a minister would not recall correspondence - even repeated correspondence - from another minister about an individual case.

"Deputies opposite, who have held ministerial office, know full well that this is nonsense, especially in circumstances where all that is involved is that of issuing a letter of refusal in standard format.

"They know that especially in large Departments it is not a question of mulling over a few letters a week but of receiving and issuing thousands of pieces of correspondence a year.

"I have absolutely no recollection of correspondence with Minister of State Molloy with regard to the Naughton case.

"I had no knowledge of the existence of correspondence between Minister of State Molloy and myself in this matter until it was brought to my attention, following the statement of Mr Justice O'Sullivan on April 10th last. I will let the facts speak for themselves."

Mr O'Donoghue said that all the correspondence was in the public domain within a little more than 24 hours of Mr Justice O'Sullivan's statement on the morning of April 10th, referring to the phone call he had had from an official in his Department.

"As has been pointed out . . . there could be no basis whatsoever for my seeking to conceal correspondence which only went to underline the propriety with which I handled this matter."