Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 268: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to the complaints of persons (details supplied); if there is substance in any or all of the complaints; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15929/05]

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am aware of the complaints of the persons concerned, which were also the subject of a parliamentary question answered on 10 May. The central issue linking these complaints is the issue of costs for persons appearing before the Morris tribunal. This issue has been raised many times in the House and the position is clear. The current legislation, the Tribunal of Inquiry (Evidence) Acts 1921 to 2002, provides that the question of costs is solely a matter for the tribunal. The Acts provide that a tribunal which, having regard to its findings and all other relevant matters, is of the opinion that there are sufficient reasons rendering it equitable to do so, can order the whole or part of the costs of representation of a person appearing before it to be paid.

A tribunal, when determining whether costs should be paid, may take into account failure to co-operate or to provide assistance to, or knowingly giving false or misleading information to, the tribunal. This has important practical implications for tribunals generally in their search for the truth. The power to decide on costs is, therefore, one of the most powerful weapons in the armoury of a tribunal to ensure the co-operation and truthfulness of the parties.

With regard to the Morris tribunal, it is clear from the chairman's judgment on applications for costs associated with the first module that he regards co-operation with the tribunal and truthfulness in giving evidence as matters of paramount importance. In deciding on costs he made deductions in some cases and totally rejected other applications where he was of the opinion that persons deliberately lied or otherwise hindered him in his efforts to get to the truth.

It is crucial that this power is available to tribunals and is not undermined. To interfere with it, however well intentioned the motives, would blunt the effectiveness of tribunals in general and the Morris tribunal in particular, in uncovering the truth and I am not prepared to do that. I have consistently maintained this policy.

As regards other issues connected with the tribunal and the position of the persons concerned in relation to it, the fact is that the forum exists for the full truth of what happened in County Donegal to emerge. The Morris tribunal has demonstrated its effectiveness and the Government has demonstrated its readiness to take action on foot of its findings. I urge everyone connected with the work of the tribunal to co-operate fully with its inquiry.

A report on the second module is anticipated in the near future and, on the evidence of the first report, clearly the tribunal will be forthright in its comments and it criticisms and will not hesitate to apportion blame wherever it feels necessary. The Government for its part will also act quickly, as it did in the light of the first report, in response to the findings of the tribunal.

On the issue of costs to date, it is expected that the tribunal will hear applications for costs associated with the second module on 13 June. This may prove to be of assistance to the persons concerned who will be entitled to make an application for costs.