Moriarty Tribunal - Robbing us for 12 years and counting

delta720

Apparently with all the news about the church, the economy and banks, this one has gone unnoticed.

http://www.tribune.ie/archive/article/2010/mar/28/they-thought-moriarty-was-all-over-it-isnt-now/

That report would have contained some central and key findings that, following new evidence from two officials from the Office of the Attorney General in recent days, surely will not now be in the final report.


This inevitably raises question marks about the tribunal because it had strongly resisted hearing this new evidence, which has proven to be clearly relevant. It finally relented in recent weeks under the threat, it is claimed, of legal action.



What if this evidence had not been heard and the final report had been published, as very nearly happened? It's a question that goes to the very heart of how tribunals, and the Moriarty tribunal in particular, operate.

After much pressure from the state and other parties, Nesbitt was called to the witness box in 2009.


Along with stating that the matter had been covered by his written advice, he said he also had a "crystal clear" recollection of giving oral advice that the ownership change was not a barrier to issuing the licence.

Does this mean that the whole Tribunal was a complete waste of money?

Or even worse were the Tribunal legal team taking this money knowing there was no basis to continue the Tribunal?

It emerged in recent weeks that the tribunal's legal team had met privately with the two officials from the Attorney General's office and Nesbitt as long ago as 2002 and were told that Nesbitt's advice dealt with the ownership issue and approved the issuing of the licence.


Incredibly, this meeting was not known to most parties involved in the tribunal until statements were circulated in recent weeks just prior to Gormley and McFadden giving evidence.

The evidence represented "an inconvenient truth" for the tribunal. Whether or not this is the case, the very fact this argument has been made at all is hugely serious for the tribunal.



Even worse for the tribunal, Judge Moriarty admitted last week that he made an error when he said in February 2008 that the Attorney General had confirmed in writing that the legal advice given by Nesbitt in 1996 did not address the change of ownership.

It would appear that this Tribunal had a goal it was reaching for, regardless of the facts. Alot of people have made alot of money from this and it is starting to look very very suspicious to say the least.

Sierra Oscar

It would be long over if both Lowry and O'Brien stopped calling new witnesses up and just stopped trying to delay the findings, basically. Of course, it all plays into their hands when they can dismiss any criticisms by just claiming the whole thing is a "money making scam".

Seth Brundle

...and who part-owns the Turbine?

Liam Byrne

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

It would be long over if both Lowry and O'Brien stopped calling new witnesses up and just stopped trying to delay the findings, basically.

Not to mention Ahern wasting more time with at least 4 false stories*

*Assuming the fifth one is true