A major proposal by Fine Gael to overhaul Ireland's libel laws has provoked sharply differing reaction from newspaper proprietors and the National Union of Journalists.
Under the Fine Gael plan, libel actions would have to begin within 12 months of publication, rather than six years as is the case now, while the media would be free to apologise without admitting liability. Judges would be allowed to offer directions to juries on damages, printers would have immunity in most cases, while newspapers would be able to escape severe penalties for genuine mistakes.
Families should be able to protect the good name of their dead, but Fine Gael proposes that a court would vindicate a deceased's reputation in such cases, rather than award damages.
Newspapers should appoint a media complaints commission, but a majority of the membership should be independent of the companies concerned, according to Fine Gael. The commission should draw up a code of conduct for journalists. The commission should then appoint a properly funded, independent media ombudsman, who would be free to investigate complaints and issue court-recognised rulings.
A media council should also be appointed, drawn from newspaper editors and publishers, the National Union of Journalists, trades unions, business representatives and other social partners, the party proposes.
Newspapers should be able to argue they took "reasonable care" against demands for general damages in libel actions, while the "fair comment defence" should be renamed "comment based on fact". However, Fine Gael said it had not been persuaded by strong arguments from both the NNI and the NUJ that the burden of proof should be moved from defendants to plaintiffs.
The Fine Gael deputy leader, Mr Jim Mitchell, who led the party's work on the issue, said they were prepared to offer privilege to reports of health boards and local authorities. TDs currently enjoy immunity from libel charges to statements made in the Dβil, but they, in turn, have to stay inside rules laid down by the Dβil's Committee on Procedures and Privilege.
"We don't want to give a licence to any headbanger on a local authority," said Mr Mitchell. "Ireland has been served badly by a culture of secrecy, nod and wink, and whispered but unsubstantiated rumour over 40 years"
Welcoming the proposal, the NNI said Fine Gael had "cut through to the heart of the issues and presented a draft which outlines, with great clarity, a libel framework that befits an Ireland of 2001 and beyond".
However, the publishers maintained their view that juries should not deal with libel actions, although it welcomed the proposal that judges would offer them directions.
The one-year statute of limitations would help newspapers, because they currently have to set aside reserves to deal with actions that may not get to court for years.
However, the NUJ was more guarded, though it welcomed the Fine Gael initiative.
In particular, the union was angry that journalists would not have a guaranteed place on a media complaints commission.
"If we are going to have to dance to the tune, then we want to be involved in choosing the band. We reject that stance taken by the NNI that only editors, who are management representatives, should be involved in the commission," said NUJ national organiser, Mr Seamus Dooley.
The implication of "the good name of the dead" proposal for journalists and historians have simply "not been worked out", he warned.
