Professor Conor O'Mahony:

Go raibh maith agat, a Chathaoirligh. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak with members about the general scheme of the online safety and media regulation Bill. This is an important Bill because of the digital environment is largely unregulated in Ireland at present. The Bill presents an important opportunity to address a number of concerns relating to the risk of harm that may occur to children during their online activities. At the outset, I would like to emphasise that the digital environment is not an inherently bad thing for children.

We often focus on the negatives but the reality is that the digital environment is somewhere we all increasingly live our lives. Children spend a significant amount of time there and it offers enormous opportunities to children to express themselves, play and socialise, avail of educational opportunities and participate in society. Children’s rights principles require that we ensure children are allowed to benefit from these opportunities and that measures aimed at protecting children from harm avoid unduly restricting children’s capacity to so engage.

However, we should acknowledge that there are important and significant risks of harm in the digital environment. As children now spend so much time online, they are exposed to increasing risks of cyberbullying, exposure to harmful material, exploitation and abuse. Although children’s rights principles require that children should have the freedom to engage in online activities, they equally require that children should be protected from harm while they so do.

My submission draws in particular on international guidance from the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child and the Council of Europe. I have extrapolated from that guidance three key principles of which we need to be aware. First, the legislative and regulatory environment must be clear and predictable. Second, the law must require businesses to meet their responsibilities to respect children’s rights in the digital environment. Third, the law must provide for accessible non-judicial remedies and grievance mechanisms while ensuring that judicial remedies remain available.

Looking at the general scheme of the Bill in its current form, there are several ways in which it falls somewhat short of these principles. As regards a clear and predictable legal environment, the Bill lacks clear definitions of several concepts, such as pornography or gross or gratuitous violence and this, in turn, leaves the concept of age-inappropriate material somewhat unclear in the Bill. It omits financial harm as a type of online harm, meaning that it has no implications around the exposure of children to online gambling. The references to the concepts of the best interests of the child and the evolving capacities of the child are quite vague and do not sufficiently explain what those principles require of regulatory bodies or service providers. Most important, the Bill does not provide for a system of individual complaints that can lead to the removal of harmful content. Finally, it does not require service providers to carry out any form of children's rights due diligence, such as risk assessments on possible forms of online harm to children.

The final point I wish to make is that international guidance has repeatedly emphasised the importance of including child participation in any process leading to the enactment of laws regulating the digital environment. No one understands better than children and young people themselves how they experience and navigate the digital environment. We would be doing them a disservice if we did not afford them the opportunity to contribute their views before this legislation is enacted.

I thank the committee members for their attention. My written submission elaborates on these points. I am happy to deal with any questions members may have.