Lawyers for the tribunal denied allegations by the Haugheys that it had redrawn its terms of reference.
In an affidavit read to yesterday's hearing, Mr John Davis, solicitor to the tribunal, referred to a tribunal letter of November 5th which was sent to current and former members of the Oireachtas seeking details of any payments received by them in excess of £500 while members of the Oireachtas.
Mr Davis said the tribunal denied an allegation made on behalf of the Haugheys that it had re drawn its terms of reference by purporting to interpret the word "substantial" in the terms as being equivalent to a sum of £500.
It also denied a claim it had agreed with the Government Chief Whip, acting on behalf of the Government and Fianna Fail parliamentary party, about how correspondence should be dealt with.
Mr Davis said the tribunal had provided clarification of the November 5th letter, under a seal of confidence, to the Government Chief Whip on behalf of current Fianna Fail members of the Oireachtas. Mr Davis said the purpose of the confidential letter was to get information as part of the private aspect of the tribunal's proceedings. The tribunal would claim privilege for this document.
The tribunal had to try to collect information which might lead to evidence and was conscious that financial institutions and other persons would be required to disclose information and documents of a confidential nature. Mr Davis said that in its private hearings the tribunal had dealt with a number of people on a confidential basis.
Until the tribunal decided what evidence, if any, should be made public, correspondence, documentations and the confidential letter would continue to be kept under conditions of the strictest security.
It would be contrary to the public interest if people were to be discouraged from assisting the tribunal in the initial, private aspects of its proceedings, Mr Davis said.
He had written to Ivor Fitzpatrick and Co, solicitors for the Haugheys, stating that the confidential letter to the Government Chief Whip contained an "express direction that its contents would remain confidential to the addressee and those current Fianna Fail members of the Oireachtas."
An affidavit read to the court by Mr Colm Condon SC, for Mr Haughey, said it appeared other persons were being given some sort of instruction (in the confidential letter) and Mr Haughey was entitled to know what direction was given to those persons who were members of the Oireachtas in relation to the request for information.
Mr Haughey was entitled to whatever documents were listed as being in the tribunal's possession unless it could be shown a document was privileged. There was, in his opinion, no privilege attaching to the "confidential letter".
Mr Condon criticised the manner in which the tribunal made orders in relation to the financial affairs of Mr Haughey's two sisters without notice to them. Notice of the orders should have been given so they could inform the tribunal they had accounts in a particular bank but that money never came from their brother and no money went out to him.
Dr John Coughlan SC, for Mr Justice Moriarty, said Mr Haughey and present and former Oireachtas members were asked on November 5th to detail any payments in excess of £500 (other than public remuneration) in money or in benefit in kind, made to them while a member of the Oireachtas.
Mr Haughey had replied that he was a Dail member from 1957 to 1992. He regretted that, because of the length of time involved, the absence of records and difficulties in remembering, it would be almost impossible for him to supply the kind of detailed information sought.
The former Taoiseach said he was concerned as to the constitutionality of the terms of reference and whether it was appropriate for a High Court judge to inquire into political matters. He said he was seeking assistance and advice.
The tribunal subsequently wrote asking Mr Haughey to identify every bank account he now held or had held at any time. His solicitors replied that the tribunal showed "scant regard for the rights of individuals or companies that are requested to supply information or documentation."
The letter added that the tribunal had set a time limit of 24 hours in respect of the matters for which it sought a response. It added: "You are therefore seeking a lifetime of financial information to be supplied within 24 hours, which period is supposed also to allow our client to be fully and properly advised by his lawyers."
In a subsequent letter, Mr Haughey's solicitors said they had been given copies of tribunal orders against Guinness & Mahon (Ireland) Ltd and a circular to Bank of Ireland branches.
The letter also listed that orders for discovery had been made against ACCBank, AIB Capital Markets plc, AIB Finance Ltd, Allied Irish Banks plc, Anglo-Irish Bank Corporation, Ansbacher Bankers, Bank of Ireland, Bank of Ireland Finance, Guinness & Mahon (Ireland), Investment Bank of Ireland, Irish Permanent, the official liquidator of Merchant Banking, National Irish Bank, National Irish Investment Bank, Mr Jack Stakelum, Ulster Bank Ltd.