Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 15

In page 4, between lines 33 and 34, to insert the following: “Distributing, publishing or threatening to distribute or publish intimate image without consent with intent to cause harm or being reckless as to whether harm is caused

4. (1) A person who distributes, publishes or threatens to distribute or publish an intimate image of another person—

(a) without that other person’s consent, and

(b) with intent to cause harm to, or being reckless as to whether or not harm is caused to, the other person, is guilty of an offence.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), a person causes harm to another person where—

(a) he or she, by his or her acts, intentionally or recklessly seriously interferes with the other person’s peace and privacy or causes alarm or distress to the other person, and

(b) his or her acts are such that a reasonable person would realise that the acts would seriously interfere with the other person’s peace and privacy or cause alarm or distress to the other person.

(3) A person who is guilty of an offence under this section is liable—

(a) on summary conviction to a class A fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, or both, or

(b) on conviction on indictment to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years, or both.”.

This amendment proposes to delete the offence of distributing, etc an intimate image without consent in section 4 as was initiated and to replace it with a new offence of distributing, publishing or threatening to distribute or publish an intimate image without consent with intent to cause harm.

Several issues were identified with the original section 4. The initial proposals by the Law Reform Commission in its 2016 report on harmful communications and digital safety was to have two separate offences to deal with the distribution of intimate images with the intent to cause harm and the taking or distributing of images without any requisite intent to cause harm.

This amendment sets out the different offences and penalties as set out in section 4(1) as initiated to intend to accommodate the various different behaviours as have been outlined. This is considered problematic in terms of the prosecution of such an offence if there is no distinction made in the offence itself as to whether there was an intention or recklessness to cause harm to the victim of the offence.

What I am proposing is more appropriate to deal with the intended behaviour separately and to provide separate penalties proportional to each. Where there is an intent to cause harm, the maximum penalty is an unlimited fine and up to seven years in prison. If it is without intent to cause harm, it is a €5,000 fine and up to 12 months in prison.