Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

We are in the early stages of many aspects of the issue but any retention of data entails a lot of scope for violation of human rights, privacy rights and so on. In that context, we have to proceed with caution and be very attentive to the opinions of human rights bodies in the State and across Europe. As the witnesses said, journalists are afforded a certain amount of privilege and protection in any case in terms of their employment and, therefore, I do not believe it necessary that they be singled out for special protection. There is a certain irony in the uproar that occurred when GSOC went looking for journalists' phone records not to investigate the journalists but in order to look into gardaí illegally invading the privacy of other citizens. When the journalists' records were sought in order to investigate those illegal acts, the journalists complained their privacy was being violated but they had no problem using the information to illegally violate other people's privacy. Sadly, the days of a free press crusading against the State are long gone, as is evidenced by Denis O'Brien owning 60% of the Irish media and those in RTÉ behaving like lackeys. A crusading press does not exist and journalists do not deserve any special privilege, although I wish there were some worthy of it. I do not think there is anything less or special there because the protections are the same. The big question is whether the protections are adequate for anybody and I have concerns in that regard.

The witnesses have said that not every District Court judge will be involved. I am thankful for that because the carry-on of some is well documented and people would be really scared if it were envisaged that every District Court judge would be responsible. That is particularly so as we do not have a judicial council to have oversight of judicial conduct in the performance of their duties. Although the witnesses have said there will be a panel rather than every District Court judge being involved, that is not enough and I would be uncomfortable with it. It should at least be at Circuit Court level. I presume the witnesses do not envisage requests coming in every day of the week and, therefore, it should not be a particularly onerous function whereby one would have to give up one's day job to deal with all of this. I do not see how a Circuit Court judge or a panel of Circuit Court judges would not be better in that regard.