Pat Buckley (Cork East, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I was interested because, with the Protected Disclosures (Amendment) Act 2022, the burden of proof is now reversed.

Does receiving a protected disclosure make Mr. Justice Mahon's job easier or more difficult? As for where the onus rests in that context, I will give the Army as an example. If someone in the Army goes to the Office of the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces with a protected disclosure and says that X, Y and Z happened, does this make the investigation easier or more difficult? I ask this because Mr. Justice Mahon will then have to go back to the Army, tell that organisation he has received a complaint concerning X, Y and Z and that the whistleblower does not have to prove that X, Y and Z happened; the Army must prove it did not. Does this make Mr. Justice Mahon's job easier?

The second part of this question concerns the change in the law concerning protected disclosures. I am sticking on the topic of protected disclosure because of the time limitations in this regard. Has Mr. Justice Mahon's office become much busier since the change in the protected disclosure law?