Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 6:

In page 12, to delete lines 36 to 39, and in page 13, to delete line 1 and substitute the following:"5A (a) Bona fide representatives of the Press, in order to be permitted to attend proceedings referred to in subsection (1), shall be required to provide accreditation of the form prescribed in paragraph (b).
(b) Accreditation for the purposes of paragraph (a) shall be provided by the Court Reporting Accreditation Committee, which shall consist of the following ordinary members:
(i) a representative of the Press Council,
(ii) a representative of the Press Ombudsman's Office,
(iii) a representative of the Department of Justice and Equality, and
(iv) a representative of the Children's Ombudsman's office,
and the Minister for Justice and Equality shall also appoint a judge of the High Court as the chair of the Courts Reporting Accreditation Committee. The Courts Reporting Accreditation Committee shall operate on the basis of majority decision, and in the event of a tied decision among the ordinary members, the chair of the committee shall have the casting vote.
Bona fide representatives of the Press, without accreditation as provided for in subsections (a) and (b) shall be prohibited from attending proceedings referred to in subsection (1).
(d) Subject to subsection (c), nothing contained in this section shall operate to prohibit bona fide representatives of the Press from attending proceedings referred to in subsection (1).
(e) Subject to paragraphs (f) and (g), where, in proceedings referred to in subsection (1), a court is satisfied that it is necessary to do so
--”.

Ba mhaith liom arís fáilte a chur roimh an Bille. It has not been long since we took Committee Stage and I had hoped the Minister would take more time to deliberate on the discussion we had about the accreditation issue last week. However, when we returned to our offices, we found that Report Stage would be taken today. The Minister either deliberates quickly or there was not a huge amount of deliberation on the issue. He was probably busy tabling his own amendments and I will take that on board.

We have another suggestion regarding accreditation of the press when reporting in the context of the Bill. It is an issue. If anybody wants to report on a gig or a GAA football match or even the proceedings of the Houses of the Oireachtas, a system of accreditation is in place. For example, the Oireachtas will not allow any old journalists or a student with an NUJ card to walk in and report on the workings of the Houses nor would they get into the All-Ireland Final in Croke Park. It is not a complicated system to put in place but the benefits of having a system of accreditation in the courts would be useful. The amendment states:

"Bona fide representatives of the Press, in order to be permitted to attend proceedings referred to in subsection (1), shall be required to provide accreditation of the form prescribed in paragraph (b).
(b) Accreditation for the purposes of paragraph (a) shall be provided by the Court Reporting Accreditation Committee, which shall consist of the following ordinary members:
(i) a representative of the Press Council,
(ii) a representative of the Press Ombudsman's Office,
(iii) a representative of the Department of Justice and Equality, and
(iv) a representative of the Children's Ombudsman's office,
and the Minister for Justice and Equality shall also appoint a judge of the High Court as the chair of the Courts Reporting Accreditation Committee. The Courts Reporting Accreditation Committee shall operate on the basis of majority decision, and in the event of a tied decision among the ordinary members, the chair of the committee shall have the casting vote.
(c) Bona fide representatives of the Press, without accreditation as provided for in subsections (a) and (b) shall be prohibited from attending proceedings referred to in subsection (1).
(d) Subject to subsection (c), nothing contained in this section shall operate to prohibit bona fide representatives of the Press from attending proceedings referred to in subsection (1).
(e) Subject to paragraphs (f) and (g), where, in proceedings referred to in subsection (1), a court is satisfied that it is necessary to do so
--”.

We are suggesting a simple procedure to be followed. On Committee Stage, a number of Members said one would expect the judge to know the members of the press in the gallery. That would not be a prudent way to go about this. I have worked in the media for a number of years.

It is not very difficult to get a NUJ card or even to have a NUJ card in a probationary position. If someone has a valid NUJ card, he or she could easily argue to the person at the door of the courthouse that he or she should be allowed to come into the court and report on the proceedings.

It is not prudent to think a judge in Galway, for example, would know anybody from Galway who potentially has a NUJ card. I could name hundreds of people in Galway who have either done media degrees or are bona fide journalists working in journalism on a daily basis and who would have a NUJ card. Also, there might be a situation where the people involved in the case are from different areas or counties. If, for example, one of the parties is from Dublin, somebody in the press in Dublin might be interested in the case and present at a courthouse in Galway to report on it in a bona fide way in their medium.

What we are proposing is a practical measure. It would not be over-onerous. It simply calls for an accreditation system to be put in place. I realise the Minister has many amendments to deal with, but this is a genuine attempt to bring forward an amendment that would be workable and practical but which would put safeguards in place in order that there would be responsible journalism in cases of this nature. I hope he will accept the amendment.