Dr. Conor O'Mahony:

I am very glad the Deputy asked that question. I participated in a study in involving a qualitative study of District Court childcare proceedings and looking at child protection in particular. We ran into many difficulties with the in camerarule in the study. At the time, we wrote to the Minister for Justice and Equality expressing our view that the in camerarule was having a chilling effect on that kind of research. To put it simply, we were able to speak to professionals such as judges, solicitors, barristers, social workers and guardians ad litem, but could not speak to parents or children involved in the proceedings. Obviously, that is a very significant gap in the research we were able to produce. However, if we had gone down the road of trying to speak to parties, we would have immediately risked being in violation of the in camera rule. An exception to the rule in regard to courtroom observation has enabled Dr. Carol Coulter to engage in the childcare reporting project whereby she may sit at the back of the court and observe and report on proceedings. There is a similar exception for journalists but it is not being utilised to any great degree, as was mentioned. However, research comes in many shapes and sizes. Research involving he qualitative process of speaking to people who have been involved in proceedings or reviewing case files, for example, is currently very difficult to conduct because of the nature of the in camerarule. It would be fantastic if there were some flexibility in that regard to accommodate a broader variety of research that would help to inform some of the decisions we need to make in the future. I would love to see a recommendation in that respect in the report of the committee.