The jury in the NAMA property fraud trial has heard that members of the Northern Ireland Advisory Committee (NIAC) were legally obligated not to put their "personal interests" ahead of the workings of the committee.
Breda Macnamara, who at the relevant time was Head of Compliance for the National Treasury Management Agency in the Republic of Ireland, was the latest witness called to give evidence at Belfast Crown Court.
Now "happily" retired, Ms Macnamara was questioned about several documents including an email she sent to two external members of NIAC, Brian Rowntree and Frank Cushnahan, on behalf of Nama on 25 June 2010.
Mr Cushnahan is one of two prominent businessman currently on trial on fraud charges arising from the sale of the Northern Ireland property loan book held by the National Assets Management Agency (NAMA).
The 83-year-old former corporate financier from Alexandra Gate in Holywood has had two counts of fraud spanning over a period from 1 April to 7 November 2013 levelled against him.
Co-accused Ian Coulter, 54, a former managing partner of Tughans solicitors who is from Templepatrick Road in Ballyclare, has been charged with five offences over a timeframe of 3 April to 1 December 2014.
Both men have denied the charges levelled against them.
The trial has already heard that NAMA was set up in the Republic of Ireland following the property crash and banking crisis in 2009 with NIAC subsequently established by NAMA to advise in respect of the property debts in Northern Ireland.
In June 2010, Mr Cushnahan was appointed as an external member of the Northern Ireland Advisory Committee (NIAC) which was set up by NAMA to advise in respect of the property debts in Northern Ireland.
It is the Crown's case that he was under a legal duty to disclose any conflict of interests that he had which he allegedly failed to do.
After being called to the witness box, Ms Macnamara said that in her former role she provided compliance services to NAMA.
She was shown several documents by Crown barrister Jonathan Kinnear KC including an email she sent to NIAC's two external members Brian Rowntree and Frank Cushnahan on behalf of NAMA on 25 June 2010.
This email set out several statutory obligations the two men had to adhere to as members of the committee and was sent shortly after their appointments to that position.
Confirming the email was an overview and summary of the committee members various statutory obligations, Ms Macnamara said: "I wanted them to be aware right from the start to protect themselves and to make sure they knew what their legal obligations were."
Mr Kinnear highlighted references in the email to the disclosure of interests and when asked to describe this, Ms Macnamara said this included disclosing "a personal interest that you might have that could potentially be in conflict with the duties that you are obliged to carry out ... so it's a question of making sure that you put the organisation first and not yourself or anyone connected with you".
She agreed that NIAC members had legal obligations do this under both the Republic of Ireland's Ethics In Public Office Act 1995 and the Nama Act 2009.
Ms Macnamara was also asked about forms that she sent out and received where Committee members were asked to provide an annual statement setting out and disclosing any potential conflicts of interest if and when they arose.
The witness said she sent out a standard letter at the start of January each year that had to be returned by the end of the month which was required under the ethics legislation.
She confirmed she sent a letter to Mr Cushnahan on 11 January 2011 which he completed and dated 26 January 2011.
When asked about this letter, Ms Macnamara said: "This was a legal obligation on the individual who had to complete it.
"We facilitated, if you like, in ensuring that they met their legal obligation under the Ethics legislation by sending out these forms and then by administering the whole process...I would have received back the copy that was coming back to NAMA in this particular case."
She also confirmed she sent out and received a total of four forms from Mr Cushnahan, who resigned from NIAC in November 2013 and who sent his final signed form the following January.
Frank O'Donoghue KC, the barrister representing Mr Cushnahan, reiterated that his client was accused by the Crown of being in breach of a section of the Nama Act.
She confirmed that Mr Cushnahan disclosed his linkage to the then office of First and Deputy First Minister at Stormont.
When asked what she did when she received that documentation with his disclosure, Ms Macnamara said it was returned to NAMA's chairman Frank Daly.
This, she said, was to ensure Mr Daly was aware of the disclosure made.
Mr O'Donoghue then pointed out that Mr Cushnahan "ceased to be a member" of NIAC on 8 November 2013 and from that point on he was "no longer subject" to legal obligations.
Ms Macnamara said Mr Cushnahan's disclosure in the January 2014 form "covered" the period in 2013 when he was a NIAC member and any interests he had during January 2013 to his retirement in November 2013 should have been disclosed in the return form.
When asked if Mr Cushnahan, apart from filling out the annual return form, was "bound in way" by the NAMA Act after his retirement to make a disclosure, Ms Macnamara agreed that as he was no longer a committee member he was not under any legal obligation to do so.
