The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse has asked interested parties to respond to a commission proposal not to name individual perpetrators in an effort to accelerate its work.
The new chairman, Mr Justice Sean Ryan, who replaced Ms Justice Mary Laffoy late last year, said in a statement today that: "We think that if we adopt this course of not naming individual perpetrators unless they have been convicted, we will be able to carry out a worthwhile inquiry in a reasonable time . . ."
Today the Commission published a set of proposals for consultation. It has asked interested parties to make submissions at a public hearing on May 24th.
Following this hearing, Mr Justice Ryan, said he hoped the Commission could give a decision on how it plans to proceed on June 16th, before resuming its work on June 21st with a general background investigation into the emergence of child abuse.
He said all inquiries are bound by the Rules of Fair Procedures laid down by the courts. Mr Justice Ryan said even if the Investigation Committee wanted to, which it does not, "we simply would not be in a position to depart from fair procedures". He said a "high standard of proof is required because (a) allegations of child abuse are very serious and (b) the events happened a long time ago".
Mr Justice Ryan referred to the "real problems" encountered by his predecessor and also that of child abuse inquiries in Britain and Australia, in "making specific findings or coming to conclusions that happened long in the past".
"We have to anticipate that there would be a large number of genuine victims of abuse who would inevitably be disappointed and even distressed at the failure, as they saw it, of the inquiry to validate their complaints".
He said the people who suffered abuse complained of being re-victimised by the adversarial inquiry processes and feel "branded as unreliable witnesses of worse" if the Inquiry was unable to reach a conclusion.
Mr Justice Ryan said, in fact, the position could be that the evidence simply did not reach the requisite standard.
Lawyers for the Commission's investigation Committee have proposed asking the Government to amend the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse Act, 2000, to remove the obligation that the Commission hear all complainants who wish to be heard.
The Investigation Committee of the Commission said it "is necessary to confer on the Committee a discretion in determining which cases need to go to a full hearing."
Behind this proposal is the time required to process the 1,700 complainants who have made allegations against a number of respondents.
The Committee said heretofore what was conducted was in essence a mini trial in respect of the allegations made by these individuals. If each of these were on average to conclude within two days, it would take the investigation Committee over ten years to hear all complaints.
The Commission also said the Inquiry was mandated to determine the causes, nature, circumstances and effect of abuse. "This Inquiry should be about broader issues than questions of personal individual culpability."
Mr Justice Ryan noted that the Christian Brothers are appealing an earlier decision by the Commission under Ms Justice Laffoy to name individuals accused but not convicted of child abuse.
Rather than wait for the outcome of this case, which is due to be heard on June 29th, Mr Justice Ryan said the Commission has decided to set out its position so people "will know where we stand".