Judges could be empowered to prevent publication of victim impact statements, Minister for Justice Brian Lenihan said today.
Mr Lenihan said he would consider whether any changes to the rules are warranted. He was speaking after Mr Justice Paul Carney told a Law Society event last night that anyone misusing their right to make a statement should be dealt with firmly.
Charlie Flanagan, Fine Gael
Mr Justice Carney, one of the State's leading criminal trial judges, said victims should be careful not to unwittingly act in collusion with the tabloid press if they choose to make an impact statement.
He said the media had at times turned "victims into such an iconic status that other participants in the trial process including the judge are handicapped in the discharge of their independent roles".
It is widely accepted that Mr Justice Carney was implicitly referring to the Robert Holohan case in 2005 in which Wayne O'Donoghue was sentenced to four years for the manslaughter of 11-year-old Robert in Middleton, Co Cork.
In her victim impact statement, Robert's mother, Majella, departed from the agreed text to question why semen stains found on her son's body had not been introduced in evidence.
Victim impact statements are agreed between the prosecutor and the defence and may not impinge upon the rights of the convicted offender.
But Ms Holohan departed from her submitted text to add further information which O'Donoghue's defence counsel could only deny in public creating a legal grey area.
In an appeal against O'Donoghue's sentence in 2006, Mrs Justice Fidelma Macken said victims abusing their right could be in contempt of court. But Mr Carney said this might confer "a right of censorship on killers and rapists over their victims".
Mrs Holohan said she was "offended and hurt at the remarks of Mr Justice Carney," adding: "I also believe that it is unfair to criticise me for giving details of how this crime impacted upon me."
Mr Lenihan told RTÉ radio that raising the issue would cause distress for the Holohan family but accepted Mr Justice Carney felt a need for the matter to be debated publicly.
"There was no suggestion that the semen that was found had any connection with the accused, that's the key point. And yet that fact was brought out by Mrs Holohan when she gave her account of how she felt as the mother of the victim," Mr Lenihan said.
Mr Lenihan said the question that arises is whether the court has the power to direct that a victim impact statement that departs from the agreed text cannot be published.
"Any curtailment of the right to report court proceedings is a very serious matter, and Judge Carney fell short of even recommending that," the Minister said.
But Mr Lenihan said that such a measure should be considered if the statement contained claims not established as fact by the court.
Labour Party justice spokesman Pat Rabbitte urged caution. He agreed with Mr Justice Carney's view that the court should not seek to alter a victim impact statement and he suggested empowering the court to ban publication may be the more appropriate action.
"However, this is not an insignificant step and one that should only be contemplated after hearing the public debate and in particular the views of victim groups," Mr Rabitte said.
Fine Gael justice spokesman Charlie Flanagan said Mr Justice Carney's criticism of sections of the media should not overshadow the need to give victims greater rights and status in the judicial process.
"Victims have struggled for too long to have their voice heard within the court system. If that cause is advanced by the debate that flows from the handling of this high-profile case then, perhaps, some good will have been done," Mr Flanagan said
A victims' charter that Fine Gael published last March proposes that victims be kept informed at all stages of the judicial process; be entitled greater compensation and have greater entitlement to restorative justice measures.