Paul Lawless addresses the Dail motion supporting Deputy Paul Gogarty’s call to remove the in-camera rule in family courts. He argues the secrecy is silencing survivors, obstructing justice, and preventing lawmakers from understanding failures in family law and agencies like TSLA.
Motion and cross-party support
Paul Lawless welcomes the motion and the cross-party Oireachtas group pressing for reform, noting government backbenchers have joined calls to examine pilot projects such as Britain’s removal of the in-camera rule. He says this debate must be taken seriously by the Minister and the Justice Committee.
Survivors silenced by court secrecy
Lawless describes how the in-camera rule prevents victims from speaking openly, discourages contact with Gardaí and solicitors, and stops the public hearing of judges’ scathing assessments. He highlights testimony from Margaret Loftus, who said the rule left her unable to detail her abuse on public record.
Evidence excluded from criminal proceedings
The speaker emphasises that evidence given in family courts can be precluded from criminal trials unless permission is granted, which he calls extraordinary. He warns this barrier has denied criminal justice and obscures how many Gardaí may have barring orders against them.
Policy consequences and oversight
Lawless argues the secrecy creates a breathing ground for corruption and prevents policymakers from seeing the full picture needed to fix systemic problems, including those around TSLA. He calls for reform so courts, survivors and lawmakers can access the facts necessary to protect victims and restore public confidence.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
I welcome this motion from my colleague, Deputy Paul Gogarty, and I hope it does receive cross-party support. There are many problems, Minister, with the in-camera rule in the family courts, and it is something that we in Aonto have raised consistently for a long time. The cross-party group has formed in the Oireachtas seeking reforms. This is very welcome, and indeed it's good to see government backbenchers as part of that group as well. Deputy Gogarty cited the example of Britain and the pilot system they introduced to remove the in-camera rule in terms of how it's working, and I do think, Minister, it's something we should look at seriously in relation to what's happening there. We have a situation at the moment which not only prohibits journalists from reporting on the horrors unfolding in the courtrooms, but also leaves people feeling like they can't talk. They can't talk to the Gardaí, they feel they can't talk to the solicitor in some cases, and there is an entire attitude where people feel a significant fear around talking about their situation. But also a situation where judges themselves, who are often scathing in their assessments, sometimes scathing in their assessments in relation to TSLA, are not having their remarks publicly heard, and that is a significant thing, that judges in some cases are scathing of TSLA and those remarks and those assessments go unheard. The problems in TSLA which have been well highlighted by my colleague Deputy Padra Tobine over many years are extremely serious. The inside of the courtrooms get much greater insight into these problems than we do, but the in-camera rule prevents us as policy makers and lawmakers getting a proper understanding of what is happening and how we can fix it, Minister. The secrecy around family law cases creates a breathing ground for corruption. Margaret Loftus, a wonderful woman from Mayo, spoke recently to Primetime earlier this year about the story of abuse which she experienced at the hands of a member of the Gardaí. She spoke last week to the Justice Committee, where she asked how many Gardaí have barring orders against them. The answer to that, Minister, is that we don't know, because of the in-camera rule. That is a shocking revelation. She was asked about her experience of family law courts. She said, and she told the family law court that she should be shamed of herself, that she should go home and apologise to her children, and if the judge was there, had jurisdiction over the criminal courts, she would throw out the charges. This is a woman who endured sustained brutal attack, lasting an hour and a half, put against the wall and kicked repeatedly, and left huddled with her children. She was speaking under dull privilege in an Oireachtas committee last week. She said that she couldn't go into any detail about what happened to her because of the family law courts and the in-camera rule. Not only this, but any evidence which she herself gave in the family law courts could not be used in the criminal law courts. This evidence would be disregarded, which is extraordinary. Her own evidence that she used in the family law courts was precluded from raising it in the criminal law courts. She could use the evidence, but she had to get permission, which is really quite incredible. Margaret Loftus has said the in-camera rule needs to go, that it is having a devastating effect on survivors and victims of domestic abuse.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
