25 Oct 24 | Ireland, News and features
Following a two-day mission to Dublin on 22-23 October 2024, the partners of the Council of Europe’s Platform on Safety of Journalists today called on Irish authorities to continue to engage with civil society in order to prioritise the reform of defamation legislation, the adoption of comprehensive anti-SLAPP provisions, the safety of journalists throughout the island of Ireland, and a sustainable model for trusted public service media.
The Partner organisations met with journalists, representatives of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) and government officials from the Department of Justice and the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media. The delegation noted with concern the ongoing delays in reforming Ireland’s defamation laws and highlighted the urgency of reform that incorporates strong anti-SLAPP provisions. The organisations also note the transposition timeline for the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive requires a timely engagement by the authorities on this vital issue.
While it is unlikely the Defamation (Reform) Bill will be passed prior to the expected General Election, it is vital the new administration gives priority to this Bill.
Without the necessary reforms, Ireland will be without adequate protections against abusive legal threats at a time when powerful actors, including politicians, are using defamation and the threat of defamation law to silence or intimidate journalists.
We further express our grave concern regarding the treatment of journalists and their sources in Northern Ireland, exemplified by but not limited to the cases of Barry McCaffrey and Trevor Birney who have been surveilled by police forces based in England and Northern Ireland to identify their sources. Evidence produced during hearings of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal has established that McCaffrey’s communications have been monitored on five separate occasions between 2008 and 2018. There have been further reports of applications to access the information of more than 320 journalists and 500 lawyers. Due to the cross-border nature of this alleged surveillance and journalism, we call on the Irish authorities to engage with its UK counterparts to ensure that such flagrant abuses of press freedom are prevented in the future.
The delegation recognises and welcomes the efforts of the Irish authorities to maintain a structural dialogue with journalists themselves, through the presence of NUJ and journalist representatives on the Media Engagement Group. Such engagement is vital at times of heightened tensions, such as demonstrations, elections and protests and is at the heart of the Council of Europe Journalism Matters campaign. We urge the next administration to maintain this work and to ensure it is resourced sufficiently in order to remain a vital and valued resource and point of support for all journalists. This could ensure Ireland can become an exemplar for other Council of Europe member states in respect of promoting the safety of journalists.
The Platform is concerned by reports of the Garda Síochána demanding access to journalists’ material particularly related to covering demonstrations. We call on the Gardaí to cease making these demands which also increase the security risks faced by journalists who may be targeted by demonstrators who believe their recordings will be used by the Gardaí. Moreover we call on the Gardaí to do more to engage with journalists on protecting them from growing threats online or offline.
The Platform partners are also concerned by the recently announced 3-year funding model for the Irish public broadcaster RTÉ, which risks resulting in staff cuts and the outsourcing of productions. We call on the authorities to ambitiously implement the European Media Freedom Act’s Article 5, which obliges EU Member States to ensure adequate, sustainable and predictable funding for public service media.
Finally, the delegation calls on the Irish government to take fresh action in respect of the 2001 murder of journalist Martin O’Hagan. A new government in the UK and an imminent election in Ireland provides the opportunity for a fresh start in this case to ensure impunity does not endure. We call on the Irish government to engage with the UK authorities to take effective actions in order to investigate this egregious case anew.
The delegation was composed of representatives from the Association of European Journalists (AEJ), the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), the European and International Federations of Journalists (EFJ-IFJ), Index on Censorship, the International Press Institute (IPI), Justice For Journalists Foundation (JFJ), PEN International, International News Safety Institute (INSI) and Reporters Without Borders (RSF).
27 Nov 23 | Ireland, News and features
The removal of juries in High Court defamation actions is one of many proposed reforms put forward by the Irish government in the draft scheme of the Defamation (Amendment) Bill earlier this year, but it has quickly emerged as one of the most divisive. Many experts contest the benefits of removing juries from defamation proceedings, arguing that they are too important a democratic institution to do away with.
While most civil actions have been determined by judges since 1988, defamation cases citing damages above €75,000 still come before a jury in Dublin’s High Court. The current defamation reform aims to improve the efficiency of defamation cases, which are extraordinarily time-consuming and expensive, while also addressing the outsized damages that juries award and the difficulty they have ruling on an increasingly complex area of law.
The proposed changes to the legislation would remove juries from defamation cases, allowing them to be decided by judges alone. The Department of Justice has argued that juries are unsuitable on grounds that they: (a) are unreliable in their evaluation of complex arguments, (b) award unreasonably large amounts in damages, (c) create delays in trials, and (d) increase legal costs for all parties. These arguments were heavily disputed during the oral hearings that were held by the Joint Committee on Justice in summer 2023. Some witnesses suggested that judges could equally cause delays, award high damages, and produce inconsistent decisions.
Through a legal review, statistical analysis of the High Court’s Jury List, and interviews with experienced practitioners and academics, this report examines empirical evidence on both sides of the debate in order to determine the extent to which juries should have a role in defamation cases. Dozens of judicial decisions and over 400 case records from the Jury List were analysed in preparation for this report, although the lack of information in the public records limited the scope of the research.
Those who support the removal of jury trials from defamation proceedings give three main reasons: outsized legal costs, extended delays, and excessive damages. This report, which you can view below or download here, assesses each of these arguments in turn.
14 Apr 23 | Ireland, Northern Ireland, Opinion, Ruth's blog, United Kingdom
A copy of the Belfast Agreement signed by the main parties involved and organised by journalist Justine McCarthy of the Irish Independent newspaper. Photo: Whyte’s Auctions
Every day the professional staff at Index meet to discuss what’s going on in the world and the issues that we need to address. Where has been the latest crisis? What do we need to be aware of in a specific country? Where are elections imminent? Do we have a source or a journalist in country and, if not, who do we know? During these meetings we are confronted with some of the worst heartbreak happening in the world. Journalists being murdered, dissidents arrested, activists threatened and beaten, academics intimidated and while we know that we are helping them by providing a platform to tell their stories it can be soul destroying to be confronted by the actions of tyrants and dictators every day.
Which is why grabbing hold of good news stories helps keep us on track. The moments when we’ve helped dissidents get to safety, when a tyrant loses, when an artist or writer or academic manages to get their work to us. These are good days and should be cherished for what they are – because candidly they are far too rare.
It’s in this spirit that I’ve absorbed every news article, reflection and op-ed column discussing events in Northern Ireland 25 years ago. I was born in 1979, my family lived in London – the Troubles were a normal part of the news. As I grew up, the sectarian war in Northern Ireland seemed intractable, peace a dream that was impossible to achieve. But through the power of politics, of words, of negotiation, peace was delivered not just for the people of Northern Ireland but for everyone affected by the Troubles. That isn’t to say it was easy, or straightforward and that it doesn’t remain fragile, but it has proven to be miraculous and is something that we should both celebrate and cherish.
The Good Friday Agreement delivered the opportunity of hope for the people of Northern Ireland. It gave us a pathway to build trust between communities and allowed, for the first time in generations, people to think about a different kind of future. For someone who firmly believes in the power of language, who values the world of diplomacy and fights every day for the protection of our core human rights there is no single moment in British history which embodies those values more than what happened on 10 April 1998.
We can only but hope that other seemingly intractable disputes continue to see what happened in Belfast on that fateful day as inspiration to challenge their own status quo.
23 Feb 23 | Events, Ireland, Legal action against journalists, Media Freedom, Slapps, United Kingdom
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”120663″ img_size=”full” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.eventbrite.ie/e/slapps-a-threat-to-our-freedom-of-expression-and-our-democracy-tickets-558832341577″][vc_column_text]
Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) are brought by powerful and wealthy entities against public watchdogs in an effort to compel them to withhold or remove critical coverage, even if it is accurate and in the public interest.
When SLAPPs successfully drive information out of the public domain, they can make it difficult to hold power to account. SLAPPs threaten not only our freedom of information, but our human rights, our rule of law, and our democracies. The use of this tactic to undermine criticism and evade scrutiny has proliferated globally but Ireland has been identified as a jurisdiction of concern in the EU.
How do SLAPPs work and, crucially, what can we do to stop them? At this full-day conference, attendees will hear from lawyers, journalists, academics, politicians, and campaigners, as well as from keynote speakers, UN Special Rapporteur Mary Lawlor, and human rights campaigner Bill Browder. Full schedule to be announced in due course.
This event is organised by Index on Censorship with support from Justice for Journalists Foundation and in partnership with Schuler Democracy Forum in the Trinity Long Room Hub Arts and Humanities Research Institute and Trinity School of Law. The conference will take place in a hybrid format, accessible both via an online livestream and in-person. To get updates on speakers and sessions, please subscribe to Index on Censorship’s newsletter.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
When: Thursday 23 March 2023, 9:00 AM – 6:30 PM GMT
Where: Trinity Long Room Hub, Fellow Square, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
