We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
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.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
THE LAW DRAFTED to allow media and others report the names of child murder victims has been signed by President Michael D Higgins.
The Children (Amendment) Bill 2020 was signed by the President after passing through the Dáil and the Seanad.
The issue had arisen as a result of a recent Court of Appeal decision about the reporting of certain murder cases. That ruling considerably changed certain long-standing practices related to how the media reports on child murders.
The Court of Appeal ruled last October that children who are killed in criminal circumstances cannot be named publicly after their death.
I’m delighted that @PresidentIRL has signed the Children (Amendment) Bill 2021 and that it’s now law.
— Jim O'Callaghan (@OCallaghanJim) April 26, 2021
Once it’s commenced by Minister @HMcEntee children who have been unlawfully killed can be named in proceedings relating to their deaths. https://t.co/StBvvvJL1h
Parents of child murder victims, media organisations and various politicians had all campaigned for the law in the area to be changed to remove the reporting restriction.
The new legislation removes the restrictions on reporting the identities of deceased children with respect to past and future cases while retaining the protection for living children.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Sometimes I read things like this and have a double take, it’s crazy that some new laws or ammendments are not already in place
@The Divils Avocado: to be fair this only became an issue following the interpretation of an appeal court. Up till child victims were named. This clarifies that interpretation.
@Paul Clancy: I think the question is, should one interpretation change the law on all matters or just the case that is being presided over? I find it strange that law can be viewed in many different ways and the latest way is how everyone moves forward
@The Divils Avocado: unfortunately there’s scavengers ready to use those cases in their own benefit giving as facts opinions and in same cases given as true the word of someone under psychotic episode.
This is most of the times a defamation of the good name and reputation of the child dead. The families suffer a third victimisation and in the public sphere.
The law is only making sure the families can name their children when they wish to do so; and protect the families from scavengers with their own agenda.
@The Divils Avocado: and then come things like at what age a child should know one of their parents killed one of his siblings when the child was a baby? How this information should be given to a child?
Like it or not, the State needs to have in place something to ensure the Fundamental Rights of each children, such as provision of a safe environment for the development of their abilities to their highest
There is a genetic element in psychosis therefore the siblings need to be protected of being in the spotlight of the media as much as possible
@Garreth mc mahon: thats how precedents is created and it was a higher court that made the ruling so lower courts are obliged to follow that direction. An issue was raised by the appeals court and has now been corrected. It’s a good result for the rule of law.
What about those under age that have killed they should be named
@Sandra Conlan: if victims can be named so should the perpetrators.
Far too much secrecy in this country in the past what they wont know won’t bother them the less said the better attitude,can’t publish names for legal reasons or they are underage despite the fact at times the perpetrators of some very serious crimes are teenagers, often secrecy just protects the perpetraters of very serious crimes.
have your say