Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

I wish to give Senator O'Meara and others a sense of where I am coming from in respect of this matter. Subsection (2) states that nothing contained in a relevant enactment shall operate to prohibit the preparation and publication of a report of proceedings to which the relevant enactment relates. If that meant a law report of proceedings, it would be one thing. However, if it meant a newspaper report, it would be quite another. Likewise, in respect of the publication of the decision of the court in such proceedings, the term "publication" could be radically different from what one might expect.

What I have in mind is a system whereby responsible people can be admitted to these type of proceedings for the purpose of research in respect of them. In addition, the outcome of decisions should be capable of being put in place in order that a corpus of existing law will be available from court to court to show how family law issues are dealt with.

I also have in mind the concept that independent persons from the public, approved in some way — perhaps by the Courts Service or some other mechanism — could act as observers in cases of this nature. I rarely practised family law but I have been struck by the number of people who have claimed that the in camera rule has permitted inconsistency of approach and worse, without any real sense that the people who felt themselves to be on the receiving end believed there is anyone to whom they can turn to say that they have been unfairly treated or whatever. It is a good idea that family law matters should be conducted with persons present who would have some legitimate function in terms of acting as observers in the broad public interest. I am considering moving along those lines. In other words, I wish to tighten up matters in terms of what is involved in publication and what the term "report" actually means, and to facilitate research and independent and responsible observers being present in court to witness what happens.

I most certainly do not want a situation to arise whereby a newspaper could send someone to a family law court to watch an interesting case to see how it is proceeding. Like it or not, it would create a sense of unease and apprehension for someone, particularly a person whose life is of interest to the public at large, if the intimate details of his or her matrimonial life were examined in front of people who might afterwards use the material they obtained to come at the story from another angle. Such individuals might also approach those who could actually produce the same story without breaching the in camera rule. This could be frightening. If a public figure who was a subject of family law litigation turned and saw political correspondents watching his or her family law case, it would be a deeply unnerving and frightening experience. It would certainly have potential to invade the right of an individual to privacy. We must strike a balance between all the conflicting interests.

I am conscious that in family law cases, fathers, in particular, claim they do not get the same sympathy as mothers. I do not know whether that is true and pass no judgment on the issue. However, it would be nice to know some research project proved or disproved that theory. I would like to have the facts rather than, as happens now, be accosted on the street and told I cannot really know what is going on.

The current absurdity whereby a person cannot be brought before a professional body to be disciplined by reference to what happened in a family law case is a scandal. This means where a barrister or solicitor misbehaves or is grossly negligent, there is a huge inhibition against proving the substance of the misbehaviour. This is another area covered by the ambit of this proposal.

I am mindful of the legitimate interests of people going into this situation to have their privacy protected. By the same token this does not mean they go into the legal equivalent of a black hole from which no information emerges in any circumstance and nobody knows exactly whether they were treated fairly or unfairly within the process. There is a balance to be struck and the Report Stage amendments I will table will be directed towards that series of issues.