Seanad debates

Tuesday, 11 March 2008

Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages

 

4:00 pm

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent)

I move amendmentNo 11:

In pages 14, 15 and 16, in page 14 to delete lines 40 to 43, in page 15 to delete lines 1 to 42 and in page 16 to delete lines 1 to 9.

This is the matter of the defence of honest opinion which goes to the crux of the reservations many of us have about this Bill. It is not sufficient for somebody to think that something may be true and to honestly believe it. One can honestly believe something that is untrue. Whether one can honestly believe a lie is a slightly different point but one can in fact because it may not be a lie told by oneself. Somebody else may have told one the lie which one then prints. It is not enough to say that one thought it was true and believed Old Joe because he is a decent bloke and put it in a newspaper.

It gets worse. Section 18(2)(a) says if: "at the time of the publication of the statement, the defendant believed in the truth of the opinion or, where the defendant is not the author of the opinion, believed that the author believed it to be true". This is believing that someone else believed something else to be true and it is like a hall of mirrors. One never quite knows where it is going to end. I am against this business of honest opinion and the related matter of good faith. What is published, either in the broadcast or print media, should be true, and to believe that someone else believed it to be true does not seem to be a good reason for publication.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.