With a tribunal of inquiry under a High Court judge at work, it is bizarre that key witnesses with important evidence to give should choose to have their positions rehearsed in the media. Mr Justice Flood has been charged by the Oireachtas with getting to the bottom of alleged planning and payments matters. It rather seems to make a nonsense of what he is at if the pages of the Sunday newspapers and the national airwaves can be used simultaneously for witnesses and potential witnesses to advance their own versions of events without having them subjected to the rigours of judicial inquiry.
Yesterday property developer, Mr Tom Gilmartin, claimed, according to reports in the E radio to amplify a claim which he had earlier made to the Sunday Independent, that the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, was aware that he, Mr Gilmartin, had given £50,000 to Mr Padraig Flynn as a contribution towards Fianna Fail. Mr Ahern, at the time when he was Minister for Labour, had also suggested that Mr Gilmartin should make a donation to the party, he has claimed. Ten days ago, Mr Flynn endeavoured to use RTE's Late Late Show to make a pre-emptive strike in defence of his own position and in an effort to secure his re-nomination as a member of the European Commission.
In ideal circumstances Mr Justice Flood's tribunal would not have to contend with these parallel attempts at trial by media. But the Tribunal has, at best, made slow progress against extraordinary obstacles while elements of the media have effectively become participants, as much as commentators on events. Key figures are not only endeavouring to influence public opinion but also to influence the very functioning of the Tribunal itself. It will be argued that in an open society there will always be such attempts to sway opinion on controversial issues and that it is part of the price that has to be paid for a free press. But the question is now raised whether the course of public events is to be determined by Judge Flood's tribunal or by the media.
The allegations made by Mr Gilmartin have serious implications for leading figures in the Fianna Fail party and for Mr Flynn. If true, Mr Flynn has a grave case to answer, Mr Ahern has misled his colleagues in Government and has failed to co-operate as he should with the Tribunal. As Mr John Bruton quickly pointed out yesterday, the Tanaiste, Ms Harney, could not credibly remain in partnership with a Taoiseach who had acted in this fashion. The coalition is posited on the proposition that the corruption of Fianna Fail ended with the ancien regime and that Bertie Ahern's party is clean.
In his brief, three paragraph statement last night, the Taoiseach said he has no recollection of any telephone conversations with Mr Gilmartin "and equally, therefore, I have no recollection of any conversation with him relating to contributions to the party or Mr Flynn". There now exists a direct and serious conflict between Mr Gilmartin's word and the Taoiseach's recollection. It is certain that Mr Ahern's statement - which raises more questions as it answers - will not satisfy Mr Bruton or the Labour Party leader, Mr Quinn, who will press for fuller disclosure. Mr Ahern may have been correct when he maintained, as he did in recent weeks, that the appropriate forum for dealing with these matters is the Tribunal and that its integrity must not be undermined. But he has now found it impossible to hold to that position. Specific, serious allegations have been made. They warrant a much more detailed response from Mr Ahern.