The High Court has directed Mr Liam Lawlor TD to attend the Flood tribunal at Dublin Castle in public session within the next two weeks to answer questions in relation to planning and other matters and to produce details of his finances. The decision was a vindication of the approach adopted by the Flood tribunal, which was established by a resolution of the Dail, and it implicitly rejected Mr Lawlor's contention that his rights were being trammelled. In spite of that, Mr Lawlor called a press conference at which he again challenged the tribunal to specify any allegations that had been made against him; protested his innocence and questioned the competence of the tribunal to inquire into his professional, rather than his political, activities. It was a typical Liam Lawlor performance: having lost a battle, he claimed vindication and continued the war.
The judgment by Mr Justice Thomas Smyth, on the application from the Flood tribunal, accorded with the political response to Mr Lawlor's behaviour, two weeks ago. In an unprecedented Dail gesture, Mr Bertie Ahern, Ms Mary Harney, Mr John Bruton, Mr Ruairi Quinn and Mr Trevor Sargent joined together in criticising Mr Lawlor for his failure to co-operate with the tribunal. The Taoiseach declared that "every citizen and every member of the Oireachtas has a legal, moral and democratic duty to co-operate with the tribunal, not to obstruct it and to comply with its lawful orders." But Mr Lawlor took comfort in another element of that statement which expected anyone who "disputed the validity or legality of any tribunal order to make his or her case to the tribunal and, if necessary, to the courts." This, Mr Lawlor claimed, was what he had done.
On October 11th, Mr Justice Flood made it quite clear at Dublin Castle that the legality of his orders for the discovery of information had not been challenged by Mr Lawlor, even though he was refusing to attend and give evidence. The tribunal legal team quoted chapter and verse to show that Mr Lawlor - in spite of his public protestations - had not co-operated with their investigations and had actually misled them. The Dublin West TD, who was recently forced to resign from Fianna Fail because of the unsatisfactory nature of his responses before an internal investigation led by Dr Rory O'Hanlon, has been particularly anxious that the evidence of the British-based property developer, Mr Tom Gilmartin, should be heard first at the Flood tribunal so that any allegations against him could be challenged. That is now unlikely to happen. Earlier this month, the tribunal indicated that Mr Lawlor had declined to provide bank records or financial information concerning payments he had received from Mr Gilmartin and Arlington Securities because it related to his business activities. It went on: "Other matters he regards as ultra vires include his personal accounts, his work as a consultant, any activities carried out when he was not a TD or county councillor and matters relating to the tax amnesty."
From the above, it is clear that Mr Lawlor is attempting to impose his wishes on what the tribunal can or cannot inquire into. That cannot be permitted. The Dail has set the terms of reference for this tribunal after exhaustive debate. Mr Lawlor himself voted for its establishment and for its terms of reference. And he chose not to challenge its most recent orders in the courts. Mr Justice Flood is preparing to investigate eight "suggestions" made against Mr Lawlor. Some of them relate to substantial amounts of money. They are very serious matters indeed. A proper investigation and firm conclusions are required if public confidence is to be maintained in the Dail and in its procedures.