Dr. Michael Foley:

I thank the Cathaoirleach and committee for having us here to speak on this incredibly important legislation.

The NUJ-Ireland and UK represents staff and freelance journalists working across all platforms, print, broadcasting, both public service and independent, online and digital, whether in national or regional media. The pace of change in the media contrasts with the slowness of reform of defamation. The 2009 Act came with a provision that it would be reviewed within five years, but it was not until March 2020 that the report on the Defamation Act was published. We are now considering legislation, nine years after that review was to take place.

While the delay might indicate the low priority given to the subject, we broadly support the Bill but urge that the process be speeded up to ensure legislation gets through. We believe many of the provisions in the legislation have the capacity to enhance media freedom by addressing long-standing concerns of journalists, media practitioners, publishers, lawyers and academics. It is important to reiterate that the NUJ recognises the right of all citizens to protection of their reputation and acknowledges that the exercise of the right to freedom of expression brings with it responsibilities to behave in an ethical manner. Journalists are expected to adhere to the professional code of conduct of the union, which was formulated in the 1930s, as well as other codes, such as that of the Press Council of Ireland, of which the NUJ was a founding member.

Members will have seen our submission, so I will just highlight some areas of concern. We would like the definition of "online publication" to be made clear. There is an anomaly in that publications by RTÉ journalists on the RTÉ website are not covered by current broadcasting complaints procedure. We do not want a situation whereby journalists in RTÉ might find some form of double jeopardy where they come under the press council and the new media commission.

We would favour a serious harm test being provided for all defamation cases as we believe it would lead to a decline in the number of cases taken. We would like legislators to look again at the definition of "honest opinion".

On the important issue of SLAPPs, we welcomed the EU’s anti-SLAPP directive and the anti-SLAPP mechanism contained in the draft legislation. The NUJ is in broad agreement with the Irish anti-SLAPP network, of which we are a member, so I will not duplicate what might be said by my colleagues here.

We believe that, in the main, the defamation (amendment) Bill could be an important contribution to press freedom in Ireland and, we hope, on behalf of our members, that we can play some part on ensuring it is.