Surely the benefit is not for Varadkar but the person he was leaking the document to.
It was a favour for a friend, plain and simple. A friend who âwanted to destroy the IMOâ and believed the document âwould help take the wind out of their sailsâ.
Yes, but for him to be in contrary of S7 of the 2018 act he has to benefit
7. (1) An Irish official who, either directly or indirectly, by himself or herself or with another person, does an act in relation to his or her office, employment, position or business for the purpose of corruptly **obtaining a gift, consideration or advantage for himself or herself or for any other person, shall be guilty of an offence.
(2) An Irish official who uses confidential information obtained in the course of his or her office, employment, position or business for the purpose of corruptly obtaining a gift, consideration or advantage for himself or herself or for any other person shall be guilty of an offence.
Thatâs probably a stronger case than @artfoley argument but I still think its touch and go whether youâd secure a conviction on it - I suspect not but even the charges being brought would inflict the real political damage.
There is evidence of the motivation behind his friend and how he thought the document leaked to him would help his organisation get on over on the IMO.
Itâs fairly clearcut that Varadkar was doing this as a favour for a friend and itâs fairly clearcut that this friend didnât want this document to sell the deal to its members but rather to harm one of the parties privy to the discussions.
The real scandal here is the GP threatening to canvas patients against him. Heâs a cowardly weasel who should have called them out on it, but that letter is surely unethical??