Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 27 May 2004

Vol. 176 No. 18

Child Trafficking and Pornography (Amendment) Bill 2004: Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

The Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 has proved to be one of the most effective measures against the sexual exploitation of children in Europe in recent years. It has been widely studied by members of parliaments in other countries as a model law in child protection.

In the current climate we have a particular sensitivity to issues surrounding child pornography. For that reason, the intricacies of the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act have come under closer scrutiny than ever before. One of the concerns that exists about the Act is that it might have the effect of constraining, or even rendering criminal, legitimate investigations by committees of the Oireachtas into matters relating to child pornography. It might also have the effect of restricting the level of co-operation between the Houses of the Oireachtas, or committees thereof, and persons from whom co-operation is desired.

In this regard, concern arises in the first instance because possession of child pornography is one of the criminal offences established by the Act. This would mean that, on the face of it, anyone who comes into possession of child pornography for the purposes of legitimate inquiry or investigation would themselves be guilty of that same offence. The Oireachtas, in its wisdom, anticipated this problem and avoided it in most circumstances by providing, in section 6(2) of the 1998 Act, that the Act does not apply to persons who possess child pornography in the exercise of functions under the Censorship of Films Acts, the Censorship of Publications Acts and the Video Recordings Acts or for the purpose of the prevention, investigation or prosecution of offences under the Act. This means, for example, that the Garda Síochána, in the course of an investigation of child pornography offences, can take possession of child pornography without fear of themselves being guilty of an offence.

As the law now stands, no exemption of this nature extends to Members of the Oireachtas who may come into possession of child pornography as a consequence of carrying out their proper functions. This creates the anomalous position that, should a House of the Oireachtas, or any committee of a House, desire to gather evidence in regard to any matter relating to child pornography, any Member who came into possession of such pornography might technically be committing a criminal offence. Any civil servant or legal adviser assisting in such an investigation would be under a similar constraint if he or she came into possession of the child pornography in the course of their legitimate functions.

Similar concerns would arise regarding the offences of publication or printing of child pornography, which might theoretically expose to prosecution a person who only published or printed the material in question in the course of legitimately carrying out a function of the Oireachtas. There is a concern that there would be an interaction with parliamentary privilege. Clearly, these would not be tolerable positions in which to put any Deputy, Senator or official.

A further difficulty arises from section 5 of the 1998 Act in that the Act makes it an offence to distribute child pornography. In section 5(2), "distribution" is defined as including the parting of possession with child pornography. This would lead to a position where a person who is or might be in possession of child pornography might refuse to hand over to the Oireachtas either the child pornography itself or computers on which the child pornography is or may be stored.

Such a person might possess the material innocently — if, for example, he or she owned a computer onto which some third party had downloaded child pornography. Such a person might not even be certain that the material in question is child pornography within the legal meaning of that expression but no matter whether a person possessed the pornography innocently or otherwise, that person might well refuse to co-operate with an investigation or inquiry by the Oireachtas because in doing so he or she might run the risk of committing a criminal offence.

The solution proposed by the Government for this particular problem is to insert a new section 13 into the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998. This new section 13 will ensure that nothing in the Act shall prevent either the making or compliance with a direction under section 3 of the Committees of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Compellability, Privileges and Immunities of Witnesses) Act 1997 or the possession, distribution, printing or publication by either House of the Oireachtas, a committee within the meaning of that Act or any person, of child pornography for the purposes of, or in connection with, the performance of any function conferred by the Constitution or by law on those Houses or conferred by a resolution of either of those Houses or resolutions of both of them on such a committee.

This Act will permit the Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas, together with any appropriate officials and advisers, to carry out their appropriate functions in circumstances where issues relating to child pornography might be involved. It will clear the way for third parties to hand over relevant evidence without fear of prosecution merely for giving the material over and it will prevent such third parties from relying on the provisions of the 1998 Act in order to refuse to co-operate with the Houses of the Oireachtas or any committee thereof.

The Bill has been initiated in Seanad Éireann and I understand, as announced on the Order of Business this morning, that another measure in connection with the compellability of witnesses legislation is now before Dáil Éireann and will be before Seanad Éireann this afternoon. The measure is a straightforward one and I have nothing to add.

The Minister of State is welcome to the House to present a Bill which is simple, yet extremely important in that it provides protection for Members of these Houses in the carrying out of their duties and any future work in that area.

As the Minister is aware, the Bill is being presented to us in the expectation that the evidence will be admissible but lawyers are still arguing in a particular case whether evidence will be admissible. Even this legislation will not be applicable in that case. The rush to deal with these two important legislative measures is unprecedented in that the two Houses will deal with all Stages of two Bills — 20 Stages — in one day. I am not sure that has ever happened previously.

I understand from people who have attended the briefings with the Attorney General that he said categorically that there would be no legislation in this regard. Why are we being presented with these two items of legislation today? Perhaps the Minister would enlighten me. What was the Attorney General's advice and if it is the case that he said there would be no legislation brought forward, whose decision was it to bring forward this legislation today? It is important that we know.

We are dealing with uncharted waters in terms of this legislation and it is important that we get it right and not make it up as we go along. That is the reason I am concerned about the rush. We need time to ensure this legislation is dealt with properly and that we will not find an individual going to the High Court before we have an opportunity to do anything. We must ensure that the Members of this House are protected. If such an event should arise I agree with it but I ask the Minister to address the questions I put to him.

I welcome the Minister to the House for the debate on the Bill, which is short but important in that it will ensure that the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 does not become an impediment to any activities the Houses of the Oireachtas or any committees of the Oireachtas might undertake.

I welcome the Minister's comments that the 1998 Bill is a model which other parliaments have examined to determine if their legislation in this area needs to be amended in the same way. It would be fair to say that in recent years there has been an increasing awareness of the need to protect children from child trafficking and other offences. That is to be welcomed. There is a need for such protection throughout the world because in certain countries children suffer from abuse. The need for international co-operation in this area is very much in evidence and I am aware that serious efforts are being made by the European Union and the United Nations to tackle that problem.

This problem is exacerbated by the increasing ease with which communication can be made between people and with images. That is one of the disadvantages of the electronic revolution over past decades and it challenges states to ensure all legislation is updated to effectively tackle any issues in that regard. Senator Terry referred to the rush to pass the legislation. Given its nature, I welcome the co-operation of the leader of the Opposition in allowing the House to process the legislation so that the Oireachtas can function effectively. It is the duty of the Oireachtas, under the Constitution, to regulate all of society.

The Minister of State has pointed out a couple of areas, under the 1998 Act, where the Oireachtas could be inhibited from proceeding with investigations in this area. The 1998 Act included certain exemptions. The film censor, for example, is not affected by the overall intent and impact of the Act. Exemptions are made for investigations into activities in this area. This facilitates the Garda. The Bill before us addresses a situation, should it arise, where the Oireachtas itself would be exempt from prosecution. The possession or distribution of pornography is an offence. This provision could inhibit the Oireachtas, including an Oireachtas committee, from functioning effectively on a question of this nature. If a committee of the Oireachtas were to proceed in the hope of an exemption, which was subsequently not given, the deliberations of the committee might be rendered invalid. It is sensible to ensure that any deliberation of the Oireachtas in this regard at any future stage is legal.

The Members of the Oireachas enjoy privilege, which is as it should be. This privilege must be exercised with caution and respect. Privilege brings responsibilities. If we have general privilege it follows that we should not be inhibited in our activities or investigations. In all fields, and not only in this one, the Oireachtas should have freedom to act responsibly in investigating any matters of public concern which might arise and which need to be investigated. It should not be made ineffective by inhibiting legislation in that field. While the Bill before us deals with a specific area, it may be necessary to make a general exemption for the Oireachtas to carry out investigations and to take possession of materials which would assist it in coming to conclusions, as it is mandated to do.

The Labour Party does not have a difficulty with this legislation. If it is necessary to put the legislation in place that should be done. I hope the provision has been thought through and is secure. A drip-feed of legislative measures dealing with issues as they arose would not be desirable. We should consider all possible future situations and put all necessary legislation, regulations and guidelines in place. Are the Minister or his officials engaged in drafting guidelines for Members? Will regulations accompany the legislation? The legislation is required; one cannot argue against it.

The need for legislation to control pornography has been discussed in the House. The Department has done work in this area but our society needs to consider this issue. While child pornography is generally abhorred, pornography itself is being mainstreamed and there are connections between the two areas. Within the pornography industry there are often links between people who are involved in either area. Exploitation is also a serious issue in the pornography industry.

Pornography has become acceptable. However, we must be aware that an image which may be fully legal may involve exploitation. As a society, we should do what we can to limit pornography in general. Of course, we must do absolutely all we can to prevent child pornography being made available.

Pornography has become prevalent and is being mainstreamed. Programmes on terrestrial television stations have portrayed the idea that the women involved in pornography are powerful and are making large amounts of money. However, that is not the reality. We must educate young people in schools to think about any image they see and to consider what is behind it, if someone is being exploited by it, who is making money from it and other such issues.

I have called for such a debate on the Order of Business. When it is held, I hope the Minister will come to the House to update us on his work on this and related issues.

With other colleagues, I have attended recent meetings on these matters with the Attorney General and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. We appreciate the way in which all the officeholders in question have answered the questions posed by Members. The Executive, parties and groupings do not have specific functions in this matter. We have functions as individual Members of the Oireachtas. In the two meetings we have had, Members have been kept up to speed with developments in this fluid situation.

The Minister of State made an important distinction. We are all constitutional experts in our own right and anyone is entitled to read the Constitution and to form a view on it. As a self-styled constitutional expert, I believe Article 15.10 states clearly that Members of the Oireachtas have the power to proceed without this legislation. The Houses or a committee established by them have freedom of debate and rights of privilege. Article 15.10 states:

Each House shall make its own rules and standing orders, [there is a clear commitment there] with powers to attach penalties for their infringement, and shall have power to ensure freedom of debate, to protect its official documents and the private papers of its members, and to protect itself and its members against any person or persons interfering with, molesting or attempting to corrupt its members in the exercise of their duties.

If we are asked to do a specific duty, it is clear that we would be entitled to see documents, papers and images which, in another arena, might be criminal. The issue for Members of the Oireachtas is clear.

The distinction, which the Minister rightly raised, relates to advisers and others who are not Members of the Oireachtas and who may have to help Members of the Oireachtas in respect of any future committee work. That, especially, is where this legislation is needed. It is not needed in the context of Members of the Oireachtas.

The Government is proceeding in a way which ensures that all eventualities are considered. It is being fair to all concerned to ensure that the proper procedures are in place. I accept that. We do not want a situation to arise where basic fairness is not applied. In changing the law, we are ensuring that will not happen.

The Government is being extra careful about the situation in which the House now findsitself. Article 35.4, the subject of debate up and down the country in recent weeks, sets out our duties in this matter. We will have to exercise those duties should such a matter come before both Houses of the Oireachtas. We should not be pussyfooting around the situation by not recognising that the Constitution is clear that should a matter come before the Houses of the Oireachtas concerning suitability or otherwise of members of the Judiciary, we must make a decision in that regard. We should not be so constrained by possible legal impediments that we do not do our job.

This legislation is necessary, in particular in relation to advisers to a potential committee. I accept the Government is being extra careful in what it is doing in this area. I again suggest Members read Article 15.10 which provides us with clear powers. I accept that with those powers comes obligations of fairness. However, Article 15.10 of the Constitution makes it clear that Members of the Oireachtas and the House have a freedom — other freedoms and rights are also given to Members that are not available to general society — that must be recognised.

It is interesting to note that the power conferred on the House by Article 35 of the Constitution is conferred on each House and in that regard this is one of those areas in the Constitution where the Seanad has equal status with the Dáil in that neither House is superior to the other in any respect.

The Constitution regulates the position regarding judges of the High Court and Supreme Court. A statutory provision relates to Circuit Court judges and mirrors the language of the Constitution. Senator Terry, understandably, asked about the unprecedented rush regarding these items of legislation. The reason for the urgency is that further steps are imminent in this matter. It is a matter of public record that there has been correspondence between the Government and a judge of the Circuit Court. It is also a matter of public record that further steps on the matter are imminent. Naturally, the Government is anxious the legal ground be clear-cut and that any matter of concern is put beyond doubt.

Senator Terry rightly raised the matter of previous advices of the Attorney General. The Attorney General has received a great deal of advice on this matter. Ultimately, however, he must advise the Government on what are the best steps to take. His advice to the Government has been to err on the side of caution and to ensure that all doubts are addressed.

Senator Brian Hayes indicated that there may be some constitutional arguments regarding the privileges and powers of the Houses and that we do not necessarily need all this legislation. That may be the case, but why let doubts remain? We should clarify the matter and put it beyond doubt by way of legislation. The Government and the Attorney General believe we should put this matter beyond doubt given the imminence of the next step.

Senator Walsh and Senator Tuffy welcomed the Bill and raised the more general issue of child pornography. Senator Tuffy also asked for a debate on child pornography in general. I have no objection to such a debate. I would be delighted to inform the House of the progress we are trying to make in this difficult area. There are many serious concerns about the Internet, the images that can be portrayed on it and their availability to children and the general population and the linkages between that and various social trends. While it would be a worthwhile debate, it is not for me to pre-empt the Seanad in terms of what it wishes to discuss.

I thank Senators for their contributions. We all realise the gravity of the situation. Not since 1922 — the current State, as I am fond of pointing out, was founded in 1937 by vote of the people — has a judge been brought before the Houses of the Oireachtas. It is necessary for us to ensure the legislative scaffolding to deal with this matter is in place.

Question put and agreed to.

When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?

Now.

Agreed to take remaining Stages today.

Top
Share