Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Some of my questions come from a lack of understanding of the process and I will ask them so it is clear for me. The Courts Service is not included in the steering group. I know Mr. Brophy mentioned some work is ongoing between An Garda Síochána and the Courts Service. I am thinking of all the work done until the point it reaches the courts system and access to the courts. I am thinking of the anonymised article from a few years ago about a girl who was the youngest witness in a sexual abuse case in Ireland. She was not even given alternative access and they had to fight at the front door. There was no room for her to watch the DVD footage at the time and they were wandering around trying to find a room. All of this work happens up to a point. How do we make sure the continuum of care is there?

Should the Courts Service be part of the steering group or the interdepartmental group to make sure there is a continuum of care? At present what happens? Is there space for the Barnahus model to exist at this stage of the process? Is a list of recommendations sent with the child? Does something flow from it when it comes to the court case? Earlier we spoke about how the supports can be tailored to the individual child's needs. Does something follow the child into the court system with regard to what that child and their family need when they get to court? Are there tailored recommendations? Perhaps the child has sensory issues. This is a missing piece that I am concerned about.

I am thinking of vulnerable witnesses but it ties into court access in general. The O'Malley report spoke about a rights-based approach and I am also thinking about the best interests of the child. I am going on a tangent. Prosecution is not the only driving force in the Barnahus model. It is about being able to look at the elements in parallel to one another. There is also the rights-based approach with regard to access to justice and the right of the child to be heard. Inherent in the right of the child to be heard and access to justice is that prosecution cannot be uncoupled completely. We do not want to overfocus on prosecution but it is very important. I hope all of these questions are tying together in the witnesses' heads in the same way as they are in mine.

Does the Garda and Tusla carrying out interviews together remove the need for separate interviews to determine whether there is a credible case for sexual abuse so they are all combined into one interview? This makes me wonder about cases in the Barnahus model that might be outsourced to the St. Clare's unit if Tusla does not have the capacity. At that point evidence is seen as opinion and it is not taken in court. Is there a case to be made that every case of child sexual abuse would involve interview by the Garda and Tusla to ensure it is not taken as opinion when it comes to court? We do not want to have a two-tier system whereby someone does not end up in the Barnahus model but the body they are referred to, which states there is a credible sexual abuse case, is not taken as a witness in court and its report is not shared with the courts. Should this be a mainstreamed process?

That is a very general question so whoever feels it is most appropriate can address it.