Frances Black (Independent) | Oireachtas source

To be honest, I do not want to repeat myself too much but the same issues apply to section 32 as to section 31. Our amendments were wrongly ruled out of order on the same basis but I will leave that issue for now.

The wording in section 32 similarly imposes a waiver on an applicant to the scheme and says that:

A person who receives payment ... shall not institute civil proceedings, and shall discontinue any other proceedings instituted, by or on behalf of the applicant against a public body, that arises out of the same, or substantially the same circumstances as the circumstances to which the application concerned related.

The wording in section 32 is particularly alarming. This wording, which refers to substantially the same circumstances, is very concerning. In a way, it seems to be trying to cheat applicants out of rightful redress. It seems to be trying to ensure that a person who receives a payment under the scheme for time spent in an institution is blocked form taking proceedings for additional harms they suffered, for example, forced family separation. The term "substantially similar circumstances" seems to be trying to say that all of the things which happened to a survivor in the homes can simply be lumped together in legal terms. I do not think that this is not how the law works in any other area. If a person physically assaults another person and steals from them, for example, we do not just blur all of those things together. Those things are treated distinctly under the law, stacked on top of each other, and justice is sought cumulatively in respect of the assault and the theft.

A second crime does not cause the first to disappear or to be reduced in the eyes of the law. This section of the Bill feels like a piece of trickery and it is a very alarming provision which we have to oppose. Again, it goes directly against the rulings of the UN Committee against Torture. It does not seem to be in keeping with the principles of law and justice generally. It is becoming urgent, and I know I am asking again for the Minister to clarify his interpretation of this section for the House. I look forward to hearing that when all the work is done.