Claims of Attorney General conflict of interest rejected by Government
The Government has dismissed claims of a conflict of
interest in Attorney General Paul Gallagher’s work for private clients in a
company law inquiry into Independent News & Media, saying High Court
inspectors and the State’s corporate law enforcer were independent in their
functions.
In a statement issued on Thursday night, after the
Opposition claimed that Mr Gallagher was conflicted, the Government also said
his private work had ceased.
Sinn Féin and the Social Democrats sharply criticised
Coalition leaders for allowing Mr Gallagher, a senior counsel, to continue
representing former INM directors in their dealings with a High Court
inspection sought by the Director of Corporate Enforcement.
Mr Gallagher had a large business law practice before he
became Attorney General last year, the second time he has held the office.
“Prior to his appointment in June 2020, the Attorney General
disclosed that he had a few existing litigation commitments to complete and he
informed the Government leaders prior to his appointment,” the Government said.
“In the normal course of events these professional
obligations would have been discharged in a short period of time following his
appointment. Due to the Covid pandemic, there were delays in the hearings of
cases, so it was not possible to discharge these professional obligations as
early as anticipated.”
The Government added that “the Attorney General has no
continuing private professional obligations” but it did not say when such
obligations ceased and it did set out the extent of Mr Gallagher’s private
work.
Russian oligarch
The statement was issued in response to questions from The
Irish Times in which the Government was asked whether Mr Gallagher’s private
client work on a €2 billion case involving a Russian oligarch was ongoing.
He has represented plaintiffs in a long-running action taken
by Russian chemical group TogliattiAzot (Toaz), one of the world’s largest
ammonia producers, in which they claim an Irish company engaged in “corporate
raiding” against it.
The defendants include Dmitry Mazepin, the Moscow-based
majority owner of another ammonia producer, Uralchem. He was a member of the
Kirov regional Duma for the United Russia party of Russian president Vladimir
Putin.
The Attorney General worked in recent months on “aspects” of
the Toaz action involving an injunction because he had committed to clients to
see out that part of the case, it is understood. A judgment is awaited.
Sinn Féin justice spokesman Martin Kenny said Mr Gallagher’s
involvement in the INM case “screams of a conflict of interest” and called on
the Government to provide a full account of his private case work.
Grossly inappropriate
In the Dáil, Social Democrat co-leader Róisín Shortall said
it was “grossly inappropriate” for the AG to be engaged in such work.
“We have the Attorney General, the State’s top lawyer,
acting for a number of former company directors of one of the biggest media
companies in the country in a case which emanated from an inquiry by the
State’s corporate watchdog. You could not make it up,” Ms Shortall said.
However, Tánaiste Leo Varadkar defended Mr Gallagher. “I’m
absolutely certain that the Attorney General will be very careful to avoid any
conflict of interest or any perception of a conflict of interest.”
Referring to the INM inquiries, the Government said the 2014
Companies Act provides that the Director of Corporate Enforcement “shall be
independent” in the performance of statutory functions.
“Furthermore, the inspectors appointed on the application of
the ODCE are entirely independent and report to the High Court, not to the
ODCE. The Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment has no
direct function in such matters.”
Comments
Post a Comment