Seanad debates

Tuesday, 20 February 2007

Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage

 

5:00 pm

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent)

Exactly, but I am saying that in what they said, they agree with what apparently was the position of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform less than two years ago. Something very remarkable has happened in the interval to change the Minister's mind so completely, and I am not being disingenuous in saying that. The Irish barristers did not merely represent the case that we should retain the right in these Houses of the Oireachtas to frame whatever laws we please. Of course we retain the right but we have to test them for constitutionality.

When we discuss a later section I will suggest to the Minister that part of the core of the Bill is unconstitutional because, again at the behest of the press barons, the Ministers appears to be creating two classes of persons, those in public life who have a lesser right to the protection of their name, and the public. The Minister quoted in one of his replies the right to the vindication of the good name under Article 40. That is one of only four enumerated rights in the Constitution. When has the State acted legislatively to guarantee the good name of all citizens? If the Minister tries to make a distinction between ordinary members of the public and public figures under this qualifying interest provision, he will violate the Constitution and I and other people in this court house will call for this entire Bill to be referred to the President for signature to vindicate the good name of every person. As a person in public life and a public representative, I believe the Minister should vindicate my good name and that the law should vindicate my good name just as it does any other ordinary citizen.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.