Seanad debates

Tuesday, 20 February 2007

Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage

 

4:00 pm

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

There is no U-turn in saying it is not inconsistent with the European Convention on Human Rights to have the law one way and then saying we are perfectly free to have it another way. There is a difference between something which is in contravention of the convention and something that is open to a decision, one way or another, by the Irish people having regard to the margin of appreciation. That is where the Senator has been completely derailed.

Ireland defends its laws in Strasbourg and states it is for the Irish people through their sovereign Parliament to decide an issue. This is not an issue for a group of judges appointed by the Council of Europe; that is the difference. There is no hypocrisy in saying we are entitled to have the law this way but we are also perfectly entitled to change it if we want to. It is sad, however, that someone would not make that distinction. At the moment the law states that if a person appeals a decision to the Supreme Court on the grounds that the damages were excessive, it can agree and send the case back to the High Court where another jury would be empanelled. As happened in a celebrated recent case, the jury could award even more money.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.