Tánaiste Micheál Martin has described as “a distortion” a claim by the Women of Honour support group that he equated rape and sexual assault in the Defence Forces with low-level slips.
He also rejected a call from the group for him to withdraw his comments.
“The assertion that there’s an equation is false and is a distortion and I’m disappointed and surprised that that construct has been put on what was a letter back to Women of Honour following a lot of discussion with the Women of Honour group and other groups and their legal representatives,” he said.
Mr Martin said the reference to slips and falls came from legal advice and that the terms of reference for the inquiry into abuse in the Defence Forces reflected extensive consultations. He said the objective is that it should not be so broad as to have to last for a decade.
Defence Forces Tribunal to embark on vast discovery process likely involving millions of documents
Teenage Defence Forces members experienced assault, psychological torture, tribunal hears
Defence Forces review serving personnel with convictions for gender-based violence
Women of Honour tribunal opens with urgent appeal for witnesses
“The phrase ‘trips and falls’ was not just in the letter. This was actually discussed in a meeting as well. There was no issue with the meeting when it was explained as to why the Attorney General’s advice is such that if you put in every single act, you’re essentially saying the tribunal can cover every aspect that’s covered by that act. So we’re saying the opposite to what’s been alleged because the terms of reference specify sexual assault in particular, and abuse and what are very serious issues. Of course, one doesn’t equate them with trips and falls,” he said.
In a statement on Monday, Women of Honour claimed Mr Martin had “sought to equate the unsafe nature of the Defence Forces’ workplace of rapes, sexual assaults and other outrages with low level ‘slips, trips and falls’.”
“It is certainly not a safe workplace with rape, violence, bullying and other proven outrages not only perpetrated but condoned, concealed and even enabled,” the group said.
In support of its claim, Women of Honour released a letter Mr Martin sent to the group’s lawyer last week in which the Tánaiste outlined the Government’s position on the terms of reference for the inquiry.
“In relation to the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005, this cannot be included because, as I outlined at our recent meeting, a reference to this Act would be very broad and could conceivably include ‘trips, slips and falls’ that may have occurred in the workplace. However, I am satisfied that, as it stands, the chairperson will have discretion to include any applicable duty of care for employees within the remit of the tribunal’s work, when and where required,” Mr Martin wrote.
In its statement, Women of Honour said “the process of negotiating the terms of reference for this tribunal has been long and frustrating” and it was still seeking further changes including an “expansion of the definition of abuse”.
