Fine Gael TD John Perry claims "serious and substantial" irregularities at a party selection convention last month made its outcome "unlawful" and "fundamentally flawed".
Mr Perry has begun a legal challenge to the outcome of the 16 October convention, in which he was not selected to contest the general election for Fine Gael in the Sligo-Leitrim constituency.
Among a number of claims, Mr Perry alleges two members of the Coolaney branch were recorded as having voted when they had not in fact attended the convention.He also claims, another member, of the Sooey branch, who was recorded as having voted had told Mr Perry he was in fact attending a GAA conference at Croke Park and was not present.
Two other members, of the Kilmacranny branch, had told him they had voted at the convention but were not recorded as having done so, he claims.
Mr Perry's lawyers were told in a letter on November 9th that the Fine Gael general secretary had "observed some unorthodoxy on the part of members and one of the candidates" but regarded the convention as having proceeded "not without a glitch or two, but reasonably satisfactorily nonetheless".
Mr Perry said it is unclear what candidate was alleged to have engaged in "unorthodox activity" on the night but it was not him.
He rejected any allegation that he had engaged in any inappropriate behaviour while voting was under way.
He alleges the party refused to take appropriate action because he had not made a complaint on the night to the returning officer.
He did not complain because he was unaware then "of the nature and extent of the irregularities".
But he claims it was incumbent on Fine Gael to ensure its convention was properly conducted.
He said the party's approach was "unacceptable and offended not only basic principles of legality but also a basic tenet of democracy".
He said it was unclear what level of unorthodoxy the Fine Gael party was prepared to tolerate and overlook.
He said admitted irregularity was in effect, being sanctioned by the stance taken.
He said any such irregularity in voting was a "matter of serious concern".
Fine Gael had also written on 19 November describing the issues he had raised concerning two members who were recorded as having voted, but had not, as a "concerning development".
He said it was "entirely inappropriate" to suggest the onus to resolve these serious issues lay on him, Mr Perry said.
That letter also accepted that more people had voted at the convention than were eligible to vote, he said.
Given such factors, he had raised a fair issue to be tried in his action, he said.
The issues raised were "very serious", relating not just to his personal rights but also the democratic entitlements of the electorate.
It is "essential" a fresh convention be reconvened, he said.
Mr Perry alleges the figures suggest the total poll on the night of the convention was 686 and the number of members registered was 684.
That in itself was irregular because the poll cannot exceed the electorate in any circumstances, he said.
For those and other reasons, he alleges the outcome of the convention, which meant he was not being permitted run for the party which he had represented without interruption since 1997, was "fundamentally flawed".
The claims were made in an affidavit by Mr Perry put before the High Court when his lawyers sought permission to give short notice to Fine Gael of his application for injunctions over the conduct of the convention.
Two candidates were selected by the 16 October convention; Deputy Tony McLaughlin and former TD Gerry Reynolds.
The convention recorded Mr Perry failed to be selected by a margin of ten votes.
Mr Perry was in court today when Mr Justice Paul Gilligan granted liberty to serve short notice of the injunctions application of Fine Gael (United Ireland) and the National Executive Council of the party.
The judge returned the matter to 9 December.
Mr Perry wants injunctions restraining Fine Gael, pending the outcome of his full action, ratifying any candidate to contest the forthcoming general election for the party in the Sligo-Leitrim constituency.
In his full action, he wants orders compelling Fine Gael convene a selection convention "by way of a poll of eligible members" and in accordance with law and the constitution and rules of the party.
His counsel Micheal P O'Higgins SC told the court he wants various injunctions and there was a degree of urgency as it concerned a selection convention held on 16 October and the next stage in the election machinery.
Unless an injunction was granted, the next stage would be ratification of the candidates which would be triggered by the announcement of the general election, he said.
Mr Perry was concerned that publication of any election material would put him at an electoral disadvantage, counsel said.
Publication of such material were matters outside his client’s control, counsel added.
The matter had been subject of considerable correspondence with a view to avoiding the necessity for proceedings but that had proven unsuccessful to date, Mr O'Higgins also said.
Among other claims in his affidavit, Mr Perry said he had learned two names were "informally and irregularly" added "by hand" to the register of voters in respect of the party's Dromahair branch.
The addition of those two names was purportedly approved by a member of the FG national executive council in a manner which does not record why their names are added, he claims.
The names of the two individuals were not members he ever previously heard of, despite being personally familiar with the membership of the Dromahair branch, he added.
At least two other persons were permitted to vote when their branch, the Tubbercurry branch, had been removed from the list of eligible branches before the convention, he claims.
