Gardai believe witness faces substantial threat

He said he had fears for the safety of David Rupert, the chief prosecution witness against Michael McKevitt who is charged with directing a terrorist organisation.

"As a result of Mr Rupert's involvement in this case I view the threat to his life and members of his family as being very real and very substantial.," he said.

He said he had no doubt that "extreme efforts" had been made to locate Mr Rupert and members of his family. "This activity is being pursued with great vigour by members of the Real IRA," he added.

Detective Chief Supt Callinan said: "To identify any of these people, either personnel from the British Security Service or people who have supplied information in relation to the activities of Mr

McKevitt, without a shadow of a doubt, their lives would be in great danger if their identities or whereabouts were to be exposed."

It was the third day of a preliminary hearing of an application by Mc Kevitt's defence for disclosure of material in advance of his trial. McKevitt's trial is due to go ahead early next year and is expected to last six weeks.

The preliminary hearing has been told that the chief prosecution witness is US citizen David Rupert who allegedly attended several meetings of the Real IRA Army Council at which McKevitt was present.

Rupert who worked for the FBI and the British Security Service(MI5) since 1994 will tell the trial that McKevitt asked him to get material in the United States and appointed him temporary liaison officer for his organisation in the US.

McKevitt's lawyers have argued that Rupert had a long time criminal involvement and they are seeking all material relating to his business dealings and criminal investigations into his activity.

Michael Mc Kevitt, (aged 51), of Beech Park, Blackrock, Dundalk, Co Louth is charged that between August 29, 1999 and March 28, 2001, within the State, he was a member of an unlawful organisation styling itself the Irish Republican Army, otherwise the IRA, otherwise Oglaigh na hEireann and that he directed the activities of the same organisation.

It is the first prosecution for directing terrorism under new legislation brought in after the 1998 Omagh bombing and anyone convicted of the offence faces a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

Detective Chief Supt Callinan said that there were files in his section from intelligence sources of many types spanning three decades on the activities of McKevitt. If these were to be disclosed, even in the form of a descriptive part, it would undoubtedly lead to identifying the individuals concerned.

He said he had no doubt about the capabilities of the Real IRA or the measures they go to identify people supplying intelligence to the gardai. The Chief Supt said there many examples in the past of the retribution carried out by the organisation of which McKevitt was part and of which Mr Rupert would give evidence.

Cross examined by Mr Hugh Hartnett SC, counsel for McKevitt, Detective Chief Supt Callinan said that the gardai had not been involved in the review of material in the possession of the British Security Service. He said he had several meetings with the British Security Service about the case.

He said the British Security Service had very real concerns about the lives of their personnel and the methodology they adopt in performing their duties in the fight against terrorism.

He said he had pointed out to the British Security Service the importance of making available to the court all matters that were relevant to the prosecution of McKevitt.

Detective Chief Supt Callinan said that the nature of the case was well known to the British authorities who had agreed with the FBI to allowing an intelligence asset to come forward and give evidence about McKevitt directing terrorism.

He said he had no material relating to Mr Rupert's dealings with the gardai and he said he had no notes of any meetings between Mr Rupert and Assistant Commissioner Dermot Jennings.

Earlier Mr James Krupkowski, the Chief Division Counsel at the Chicago field office of the FBI, admitted that the Irish DPP had not been furnished with all files relating to David Rupert, the chief prosecution witness against Mc Kevitt.

He told McKevitt's counsel Mr Hugh Hartnett SC: "Rummaging through FBI files is not allowed."

Mr Krupkowski said that the decision on what information to release to the Irish authorities was taken by up to 10 people including himself, FBI agents, programme managers at FBI headquarters and the National Security Lawyer.

He said that there had been lengthy meetings involving the Irish authorities and some of these meetings lasted a week. He said: "It started in full swing in January 2001 where several agents went through files. Following that, I met three times with DPP representatives and we went through the files."

He said that up to 10 people were involved over a year-and-a-half. This involved four sessions with the DPP'S representatives where the National Security Lawyer was present and three sessions where he himself was present.

Mr Krupkowski said that the decision on what information should be withheld was primarily taken by himself, the National Security Lawyer, and other officials where a higher level of government authorisation was needed. He admitted to Mr Hartnett that he was not an expert on "Irish terrorist matters".

Mr Krupkowski told Mr Hartnett that there was a schedule of material that had been redacted(edited) but he refused to hand it over and said it was "classified".

When the file containing the schedule was brought into court and examined by Mr Krupkowski he admitted that it was not marked "classified" but he said that the explanation for the codes was marked "top secret".

He said a "top secret" document in the United States would normally be kept in a vault in a sealed room. "I would treat this as a very sensitive document. Obviously we don't have the facilities here as we have in the United States."

Mr Krupkowski agreed that the FBI had withheld documents from the prosecution and added: "In our country the Supreme Court has determined that the defence does not have the right to rummage through investigation files. It is our policy not to disclose classified information."

Under cross examination Mr Krupkowski admitted that there were circumstances in which the FBI would not disclose documents even if the United States Supreme Court ordered it.

He said he could not recall any of the withheld information dealing with Rupert's criminality but agreed it was possible.

The court heard closing submissions today from Mr George Birmingham SC for the State and Mr Hartnett. Mr Hartnett's submission continues tomorrow.