An official at the Attorney General's office was responsible for the error that led to the State being unprepared for the recent Supreme Court striking down of the Statutory Rape law, a Government report has concluded.
The report found the official had made a genuine mistake in not notifying Attorney General Rory Brady when taking over the case in 2004 from those appointed to it by the Attorney General two years earlier.
Mr Brady was cleared of committing any error when the Supreme Court ruled in May that the law was unconstitutional.
A self-confessed child rapist known as Mr A was released on foot of the judgment, creating a public ouctry.
There were further applications from those convicted of statutory rape seeking release, and Mr Ahern told the Dáil last month that 42 people were facing charges under the unconstitutional Section 1 (1) of the 1935 Criminal Law Act.
Following the scandal, Department of Finance official Eddie Sullivan was appointed to investigate why the AG had not informed the Government of the imminent judgment.
The initial explanation was that there had been a breakdown in communication within the AG's office and new measures were put in place.
The office was first notified at the end of 2002 that there was a challenge to the statutory rape law on the grounds that it did not offer a defence of "mistake as to age".
Mr Brady appointed a senior and junior council to deal with matter on behalf of his office and the Director of Public Prosecutions.
There were no further submissions to the AG's office until the CC case on May 30th, 2006, that led to the striking down of the law.
But in 2004 a reorganisation of work in the office led to the transfer of the case to a different official.
Mr Sullivan's report says the new official handling the case was aware that it was of "significant legal importance . . . concerning statutory interpretation and constitutional principles".
The report says it accepted by all relevant parties that the matter should have been referred to Mr Brady, but it only emerged at the end of May this year that it had not.
"It is clear to me that there was no conscious or deliberate decision to withhold notification or information from the Attorney General, nor was there any suggestion of cover-up or concealment either ex-anteor post-factum.
"The simple but regrettable fact of the matter is that the case should have been brought to the attention of the Attorney General on a number of different occasions in accordance with stated and well known office policy and procedures but it was not."
It was "extremely difficult" to guarantee such errors would not recur, but Mr Sullivan said new procedures put in place after the debacle and implementation of recommendations in his report, would "reduce the risk" of a recurrence.
A series of "alert mechanisms" and procedural and IT protocols were either recommended or were already being implemented, the report said.
Among the new procedures Mr Sullivan recommended was a regular external review of the AG's office "risk assessment procedures". He also recommended there be a review of all new procedures implemented in six months.