Does Irish libel law cover reporting the European Parliament?

Scofflaw

Rather a lot on Twitter about it at the moment - Paul Murphy 'outing homophobes' under parliamentary privilege in the European Parliament as part of the discussions on the Lunacek Report ("roadmap on homophobia").

Murphy's comments are by way of response to RTE's €85k settlement with John Waters and others including the head of the Iona Institute for allowing them to be called homophobic on air. Murphy describes it as "an attack by the conservative right-wing forces in Ireland, acceded to by RTE, designed to censor debate in advance of a likely referendum on marriage equality".

I can't help but wonder - Irish libel law specifically excludes as libel any reporting of Oireachtas proceedings:

A fair, accurate and contemporaneous media report of Oireachtas or court proceedings is also absolutely privileged, even if the reporter is motivated by malice. Clearly this exception is aimed at allowing free speech for members of the judicial and legislative arms of government, and for accurate reports of their views. - See more at: http://www.lawyer.ie/defamation#sthash.V32mWOsQ.dpuf

For those who might wish to report on Murphy's words in the EP, is there a similar protection extended to a "fair, accurate and contemporaneous media report" of EP proceedings? I'm not aware of one, although the parallel is more than obvious - and, as you might notice, I have not repeated any of Murphy's accusations or provided a link to them, because I don't know whether there is any such protection under Irish law. Does that seem odd to anyone else?

cordially,
Scofflaw

sawdoubters

http://politicalreform.ie/2013/03/12/parliamentary-privilege-isnt-meant-to-be-for-this/

Scofflaw

sawdoubters wrote: »

http://politicalreform.ie/2013/03/12/parliamentary-privilege-isnt-meant-to-be-for-this/

Not at all relevant, I'm afraid - a different sort of privilege, an alrady specifically protected Oireachtas privilege, and not even a free speech issue.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Happyman42

Is the OP wanting to get something off his/her chest?

Manach

Leaving aside the actual remarks and just terming them the defamatory material, then at the EP level then this is a body outside Irish jurisdication and can of course publish whatever is within their own guidelines.
As for if this can be then re-published as fair comment by Irish press, then one would have to recognise that Free Speech, which the libel laws by their nature work against, is an important but qualified right - so there is scope for "oddness". For instance the UK Press had a super-injunction applied against them on numerous occasions to prevent publication of material that was widely available on the web and there is the similar case in Canada of Homolka, a murder trial where press freedoms were curtailed.
My guess is that the Press Council/Ombudsman would have a major input on what could be published in Ireland on such a matter.

Scofflaw

Manach wrote: »

Leaving aside the actual remarks and just terming them the defamatory material, then at the EP level then this is a body outside Irish jurisdication and can of course publish whatever is within their own guidelines.
As for if this can be then re-published as fair comment by Irish press, then one would have to recognise that Free Speech, which the libel laws by their nature work against, is an important but qualified right - so there is scope for "oddness". For instance the UK Press had a super-injunction applied against them on numerous occasions to prevent publication of material that was widely available on the web and there is the similar case in Canada of Homolka, a murder trial where press freedoms were curtailed.
My guess is that the Press Council/Ombudsman would have a major input on what could be published in Ireland on such a matter.

I would imagine so - however, the idea behind the parliamentary privilege of free speech is so that the people's elected representatives are free to speak on anything they feel needs saying.

The European Parliament, while, as you say, a body outside the jurisdiction of Ireland, and therefore in that sense immune to Irish libel laws (and protected, afaik, by its own parliamentary privilege of free speech), is also somewhere we Irish citizens send elected representatives to represent our interests.

It seems anomalous to me, therefore, that the same privilege of accurate reportage does not appear to exist in relation to the EP, since the principle and the situation is identical. I'm not sure what the value the free speech of an elected Irish representative has if it cannot be, in turn, freely reported.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Pro Hoc Vice

The actual legislation,

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2009/en/act/pub/0031/sec0017.html#sec17

17.— (1) It shall be a defence to a defamation action for the defendant to prove that the statement in respect of which the action was brought would, if it had been made immediately before the commencement of this section, have been considered under the law in force immediately before such commencement as having been made on an occasion of absolute privilege.


(c) made in the European Parliament by a member of that Parliament,

(d) contained in a report of a statement, to which paragraph (c) applies, produced by or on the authority of the European Parliament,

(m) made in proceedings before a committee of the European Parliament,

For the full list see the link above.

Just as an aside there is no libel in Ireland since the 2009 Act, it is just Defamation now. I am surprised no one went to the source to answer the question.

Scofflaw

infosys wrote: »

The actual legislation,

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2009/en/act/pub/0031/sec0017.html#sec17

17.— (1) It shall be a defence to a defamation action for the defendant to prove that the statement in respect of which the action was brought would, if it had been made immediately before the commencement of this section, have been considered under the law in force immediately before such commencement as having been made on an occasion of absolute privilege.


(c) made in the European Parliament by a member of that Parliament,

(d) contained in a report of a statement, to which paragraph (c) applies, produced by or on the authority of the European Parliament,

(m) made in proceedings before a committee of the European Parliament,

For the full list see the link above.

A definitive answer, for which thanks! I thought that it should be there, and it is - occasionally the world makes sense.

infosys wrote: »

Just as an aside there is no libel in Ireland since the 2009 Act, it is just Defamation now. I am surprised no one went to the source to answer the question.

Ah, well, there's a tendency to refer to defamation informally as libel still. I'm not sure slander hadn't been something of an anachronism for rather a while, so of the two defamation really equates to libel.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Carawaystick

of course, there is also the possibility of the EP or EC making law, giving citizens the right to report on the EP; or giving the EP privilige.

Best of all, the EC can make laws and then say it's a secret, like regulation 1546 of 2006
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:286:0006:0007:EN:PDF

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:286:0006:0007:EN:PDF

Scofflaw

Carawaystick wrote: »

of course, there is also the possibility of the EP or EC making law, giving citizens the right to report on the EP; or giving the EP privilige.

Best of all, the EC can make laws and then say it's a secret, like regulation 1546 of 2006
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:286:0006:0007:EN:PDF

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:286:0006:0007:EN:PDF

In that case, the law itself is not secret, as you demonstrate by linking to it - it is the detailed measures in the Annex that are not disclosed.

cordially,
Scofflaw