SOLICITORS FOR a Danish consultant who may give evidence to the Moriarty tribunal have said a statement made by the tribunal to Taoiseach Brian Cowen, concerning his client, is not correct.
The solicitors were responding to a report in The Irish Timeslast week where Mr Cowen told the Dáil he had been informed by tribunal chairman Mr Justice Moriarty that the consultant, Michael Andersen, had not yet signalled he was agreeable to attending the tribunal as a witness.
Mr Andersen was a key adviser to the State during the 1995 mobile phone licence competition that was won by Esat Digifone, the consortium founded by businessman Denis O’Brien.
However, he did not give evidence to the tribunal’s marathon inquiry into the competition over concerns of his firm’s then parent company that a liability could be created for it through co-operating with the tribunal.
The tribunal issued its confidential provisional findings in October 2008 but Mr Andersen has now indicated he is no longer precluded from giving evidence.
In the Dáil last week Mr Cowen said he had written to Mr Justice Moriarty about the timescale for the completion of the tribunal. He said the judge told him that as Mr Andersen had not yet signalled “that he is agreeable to attending as a witness”, it was not possible to be definitive about a timescale.
Solicitors for Mr O’Brien contacted Mr Andersen’s solicitors and sent them a copy of the news report. In response, solicitor Carsten Pals, of Bech Bruun solicitors, Copenhagen, noted that the article “stated that my client has not yet signalled to the tribunal that he is agreeable to attending as a witness. This is not correct.
“My client is clearly prepared to give sworn evidence to the tribunal which he communicated to the tribunal in a letter of April 20th, 2010, to the tribunal.”
Mr Pals said he had repeated that his client was “willing and available to give evidence” in a letter on May 4th.
Mr Pals said he had sought certain information from the tribunal in order for Mr Andersen to get a better understanding of the tribunal’s processes.
“The request for such information cannot in my opinion be interpreted as an indication that my client is unwilling to give evidence,” said Mr Pals.
The precise nature of the information being sought by Mr Andersen is not known.
It first emerged early last month that Mr Andersen might now be available to give evidence. Lawyers for Mr O’Brien contacted him around that time and asked him if it was still the case he could not give evidence. He said he could, and a statement setting out the evidence he might give was forwarded by Mr O’Brien’s legal team to the tribunal.
In that statement, Mr Andersen said he believed there was no interference by former minister for communications Michael Lowry in the licence process.