Sir - Mr Hugh O'Flaherty, former judge of the Supreme Court, has stated that he cannot attend before the Oireachtas Joint Committee over the Sheedy affair as it would touch on his judicial functions and so would be unconstitutional. He also entirely accepts the Chief Justice's finding that his involvement was motivated by "humanitarian considerations".
Perhaps now he might consider his position in relation to Article 34.5.1 under which he made a very solemn and a very serious declaration when he first took office as a judge. It reads: "In the presence of Almighty God I do solemnly and sincerely promise and declare that I will duly and faithfully and to the best of my knowledge and power execute the Office of Chief Justice (or as the case may be) without fear or favour, affection or ill-will towards any man, and that I will uphold the Constitution and the laws. May God direct and sustain me."
Is he still seriously suggesting that the exercise of "judicial functions" on "humanitarian grounds" on behalf of a friend of a friend is compatible with acting without fear or favour, affection or ill-will towards any man? It seems to me that, while Mr O'Flaherty may have mastered the contents of the law library, he has fallen badly behind in the basic street wisdom - e.g., when you're in a hole, stop digging!
His best (and only?) option now is to come out with his hands up, sit down with the joint committee and co-operate in full. The position of ex-judge Cyril Kelly is less clear-cut, as his were undoubtedly "judicial functions", and is best left to the experts; but if we get the stories of two of the three players involved in this unfortunate incident, we'll be well on the way to restoring the Irish legal system to its rightful elevated position in the administration of our society. - Yours, etc., John Newman,
Dublin 11.