Counsel for the Taoiseach yesterday accused a barrister for the Mahon tribunal of trying to push square pegs into round holes in the tribunal's inquiry into the finances of Bertie Ahern.
Colm Ó hOisín SC, counsel for Mr Ahern, said that Des O'Neill SC, for the tribunal, had done this in his questioning of AIB official John Garrett concerning a cash lodgment made on Mr Ahern's behalf in December 1994.
Mr Ó hOisín asked Mr Garrett to accept the proposition during questioning yesterday afternoon.
However chairman of the tribunal Judge Alan Mahon said the question was not appropriate for the witness.
Mr O'Neill said the comment was a personal and improper attack on him, and one that he rejected.
Mr O'Neill said he had questioned Mr Garrett about "figures that are mathematically based" and could be scrutinised. If Mr Ó hOisín believed any of the figures put forward were incorrect, he should tell the tribunal. He invited Mr Ó hOisín to retract the remark. However Mr Ó hOisín said his remark was based on "fact" and on review of the questioning of Mr Garrett.
During the cross-examination of Mr Garrett by Mr Ó hOisín, counsel repeatedly referred to the tribunal's "hypothesis" and "theory" concerning the lodgment.
On Tuesday Mr Garrett was examined by Mr O'Neill as to the possibility that the lodgment in December 1994, could have been a lodgment of $45,000, and not a lodgment of, mostly, sterling cash along with some Irish pounds, as stated by Mr Ahern.
Mr Garrett told Mr Ó hOisín that without a bank document known as a tally roll, there was no direct record of the particular transaction.
Mr Ó hOisín said it was possible to make a hypothesis from the available bank documents, but not to draw any particular conclusion. "That's correct," said Mr Garrett.
"I haven't seen any document that shows it was $45,000," Mr Garrett said. He said bank documents that showed sterling to a maximum value of IR£1,921.53 had been received by the bank branch at issue that day, could be mistaken. The records showed that the value of non-sterling foreign currency received that day was IR28,969.34. Mr Garrett said the documents might be incorrect, with the currency types being incorrectly transposed on the documents.
Conor Maguire SC, also for Mr Ahern, asked that the tribunal staff member who had drafted a spreadsheet used during Mr Garrett's evidence, be called. The spreadsheet dealt with foreign exchange matters linked to the December 1994 lodgment, and indicates that the amount lodged was more likely to have been dollars than sterling.
Mr Maguire said the document contained figures and extrapolations that have been chosen "for the purposes of an argument".
He said the document was contentious, and was constructed in pursuit of a particular hypothesis. He said particular figures were highlighted to a particular purpose.
"I want to disprove the connection between some of the figures that are supposedly connected according to the hypothesis being advanced," he said.
Mr O'Neill said the document was not evidence. Evidence was the response from a witness to documents produced by the tribunal. Judge Mahon said it was not the practice to call as witnesses tribunal staff who had prepared such documents. He will rule on the matter today, when a new bank witness, Philip Murphy, is to be called.
