Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
MINISTER FOR JUSTICE Helen McEntee has welcomed both Houses of the Oireachtas passing new legislation criminalising the distribution of intimate images without consent.
The Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Bill 2017 covers a wide range of offences, including online abuse, cyberbullying, and image-based abuse.
It has come to be referred to as Coco’s Law after Nicole ‘Coco’ Fox Fenlon, who took her own life in 2018 after a period of prolonged abuse online.
It will provide for two new offences dealing with the non-consensual distribution of intimate images.
The first offence will deal with the taking, distribution, publication or threat to distribute intimate images without consent, and with intent to cause harm to the victim. It will carry a maximum penalty of an unlimited fine and/or 7 years’ imprisonment.
The second offence deals with the taking, distribution or publication of intimate images without consent without a requirement that the person intended to cause harm to the victim. It will carry an offence of a maximum penalty of a €5,000 fine and/or 12 months’ imprisonment.
Minister McEntee said: “The importance of ensuring that abuse in all forms and using any medium can be tackled cannot be under-estimated. The taking or sharing of intimate images without consent is abuse and will not be tolerated.
This new legislation will give An Garda Síochána the tools they need to make sure that those who commit this abusive crime can be prosecuted and, if prosecuted, our Courts will have sentences available that reflect the level of harm these crimes cause to their victims.
Existing laws will also be updated in the area of harassment, broadening the scope of the offence of harassment to cover all forms of persistent communications about a person. The most serious forms of harassment will now be punishable with seven to ten years in prison.
The bill had cross party support and made its way quickly through the Oireachtas in recent weeks.
The minister added: “I especially want to remember Nicole Fox and to acknowledge the selfless efforts of her mother Jackie. Jackie has tirelessly campaigned to raise awareness about the harmful effects of online abuse and to make our laws stronger in this area.
Nicole and Jackie are one of the main reasons that I was determined to deliver on my promise that the Bill would pass through the Dáil and Seanad before Christmas. Nicole’s memory and Jackie’s campaign to honour her are recognised in the explanatory memorandum accompanying the legislation.
Labour’s Brendan Howlin, who first introduced the bill in 2017, said he was happy to see this legislation passed and that it will “make the internet a safer place”.
“Today I am thinking most of the parents and family members who worked with me to ensure this became law, in honour of lost daughters, sons and family members, and all those who have been damaged by online abuse.
“We all know the often-tragic consequences of online harassment and image based sexual abuse and the passage into law of this important Bill will ensure that the perpetrators of this vile abuse will be brought to justice.
I first introduced this Bill in 2017 on foot of a campaign from Jackie Fox following the tragic death of her daughter Nicole because of a persistent campaign of online harassment. I would like to pay tribute to Jackie for her advocacy and tenacity in ensuring that this Bill was kept on the political agenda. I am very proud that the Bill will be called ‘Coco’s Law.
“In September of this year, I accepted a petition with over 33,000 signatures calling for this law to be passed and heard the moving testimony from parents who have lost children to online harassment. I want to pay tribute to them for their advocacy in the most tragic of circumstances. I also want to thank the Minister for Justice, and members of both Houses for working with me in recent weeks to finally get this much needed bill passed into law.”
Need help? Support is available:
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
We have known about this patent cliff for years, yet we have supported generic products who do not engage in R&D. The downside of that is that large Pharma companies are not investing in NPD because of falling revenues and we have no new drugs to take over. We have done nothing to encourage R&D and we are going to pay a heavy price unfortunately.
The pharma companies are not sleep walking into this and have been living with this kind of thing as part of their normal business risks for years.
The good ones will be bringing replacement product on stream and selling the patent rump to generic manufacturers as they free up capacity for new product.
It is a well trodden path
“with the country’s pharmaceutical industry currently generating 50 per cent of the total amount of the nation’s exports”
Merchandise exports, not total exports. Ireland is ahead of the curve internationally in switching to services exports (software, consultancy, financial services, etc) and they now constitute 50% of all exports, so pharma is – after some simple multiplication – about a quarter of total exports.
This is a relatively serious issue, not because it is unexpected or even because of the effect it will have on our export statistics, but because of the effect it will have on (a) corporate tax revenues, and (b) FDI decisions by pharma firms in relation to existing and new plants.
Don’t forget that there is also a generic pharmaceutical industry in Ireland that provide people with affordable medicines. Some of those people could not afford the medicines when it is not generic!
When I was in college I did my work placement with Eli Lilly and it was an amazing place to work. They really look after their staff; the (very subsidised) canteen was award winning and as good as any restaurant. They threw a big party for everyone’s kids at Christmas and gave them Easter eggs as well. They really do everything they can to provide a safe working environment; with schemes such as flexi time (where possible) and of course employees are well paid.
These are exactly the kind of employers we should be supporting/keeping in this country.
@Patrick The Cipramil/Lexapro, Losec/Nexium, Clarityn/NeoClarityn trick has been closed by European regulators.
Overall, this is not a huge issue as Pfizer bought Wyeth recently, as the latter have a better “pipeline” of new drugs coming to the market. Pfizer would have negotiated the price for Lipitor which allowed them to cover the costs of developing it. If they had spent the money on developing new products rather than on marketting, they might not be in the position they are now.
Anyway, can we see real figures of what is contributed to people and the economy, rather than the not very informative figures of what value was exported?
So do you not just alter the drug ingredients slightly, give it a new brand name, work the marketing magic and take out a patent on the new brand and you’re away again ?? Example is Cipramil which is now called Lexapro because the patent ran out. So the manufacturer used a different binding agent in the drug, put it in a new box and off they went again with a “new” product and a new patent. I’m sure there might be a few sweeteners offered to doctors as well to prescribe the new named drug ! So for these reasons I don’t see the expiration of some patents being much of an issue really. It’s cheap labour in Asia that’s more of a worry where major manufacturers move their entire operations over to India or somewhere at a fraction of the cost.
No this is now not allowed. It used to be but unless it’s a completely new formulation the FDA and EMEA will not grant licenses.
When we talk about Pharma exports being a quarter of our total exports…
…how much of that is real exporting and how much of that is part of the double Irish tax dodge?
More of a question than a comment but can patents not be extended?
A normal patent gives you 20 years. You can apply for an extra 5 years in special circumstances i.e. drug companies. Assume that all this has been well researched by whoever owns the rights to Lipitor
You can. The makers of Prozac extended their patent by inventing a new disorder based on PMS. They then made the pills pink, whacked the price up 300% and called it “serafem”. They also marketed it to dogs as “reconcile”.
Check out the documentary “Big Pharma, Big Bucks”, it explains it all :)
Here is another question, how much does the hse spend on these companies products each year?
a good few of the companies are/will merge with other larger companies so it is a concern that the patents are coming on stream but the industry is adaptable !
have your say