The Irish government has been considering the Defamation Bill 2006 for…well, obviously quite some time now. The Bill, which would replace the outdated Torts of Libel and Slander with the single act governing all forms of defamation, has had a troubled history, to say the least. The history of the bill can be read (with an excellent commentary) here, and further posts regarding it (and the wider issue of defamation in Ireland) here. Seanad Éireann (the senate, for foreigners) passed the bill last year (renaming it “2008” in the process) but since then, it’s been in limbo, as the Dáil (main house of government) has had more important recession-fighting issues to tackle.

This is bad news for the media industry at large, since Ireland’s system currently in place is pretty horrific.

(As an aside, I really recommend reading the posts at the above links. Dr Eoin O’Dell is a professor of law at Trinity College Dublin, and somewhat of an expert on Irish media law. He’s also a member of Digital Rights Ireland.)

I know that many people have had concerns over the new legislation, but the fact is that anything would be an improvement over the current state of affairs. Some of the benefits of the new bill:

Section 20: Offer to make amends.

This section allows the publisher to offer a correction, clarification, amendment, etc. and/or offer financial compensation without endangering their position in future: in fact, it even allows (with some limitations) for the making of such an offer to be a defence in court, should the offer be refused by the other party. Under the current law, admitting fault is a risky business, because it’s often seen as an admission of liability. In fact, this is expressly dealt with in:

Section 22: Apology.

The great addition here is simply that, if a public/published apology is made:

(3) In a defamation action, an apology made by or on behalf of a
defendant in respect of a statement to which the action relates—

(a) does not constitute an express or implied admission of
liability by that defendant, and

(b) is not relevant to the determination of liability in the
action.

(4) Evidence of an apology made by or on behalf of a person in
respect of a statement to which the action relates is not admissible
in any civil proceedings as evidence of liability of the defendant.

Section 34:Abolition of certain common law offences.

Common law offences of criminal libel, seditious libel and obscene libel are abolished.

Section 41 (Schedule 2): The Press Council of Ireland

The press council of Ireland is the national press regulation body, and it’s written into this legislation. In my opinion, this is a wonderful addition to the law. The press council is made up of representatives of major sectors of Irish society, and, crucially, the press itself. Among its founding principles are the freedom of the press and the protection of sources.

Further, this section details the ability of the Press Ombudsman, appointed by the council, to determine the merit of complaints and demand a correction by the publication in question outside of formal court proceedings- something which is designed to be fair, quick and free. This is something that’s absolutely necessary in the modern world.

Further, if a case ends up in court, whether or not the publication adhered to the codes of conduct of the press council and/or abided by decisions of the ombudsman will be taken into account. Which might well be crucial in the deciding of such a case.

The problem here is that the Press Council has been in existence since January 2008, and has been accepting paid subscriptions since then. But, with the current delays, it has no corresponding legislation- and, one could therefore argue, no real power. What happens to all the apologies or corrections published? Are they admissions of liability? The press council here has the potential to be the first decent example of press regulation (the UK press complaints commission, from my reading, seems to be widely regarded as ineffectual). Yet the high ideals are being crippled by this slow progress. I’m speaking here not as a cynic, or someone who wants to see the body fail, but rather someone who set up the first student membership of the press council for the student publications of Trinity College.

There’s been enough time wasted on this. As soon as there’s a let up in financial issues in the Dáil, this is something I want to see pushed through- though not without consideration, of course. The last thing we want is an incomplete and rushed version.

Posted by Dave Molloy in •Journalism

Comments:

Add a Comment: