Children’s Ombudsman calls for clarity on the application of the ‘in camera’ rule

• Ombudsman for Children urges Taoiseach to examine application of ‘in camera’ rule as part of legislative change
• ‘In camera’ rule as currently interpreted can shield institutions from scrutiny and is not acting in the best interests of all children

The Ombudsman for Children, Emily Logan, has written to An Taoiseach, Brian Cowen TD, to urge the Government to provide clarity on the application of the ‘in camera’ rule.

In this communication the Ombudsman for Children has highlighted that the way in which the ‘in camera’ rule is being applied is impeding the examination of some investigations undertaken by her Office. This can serve to shield institutions from a statutory investigation initiated by or on behalf of a child. In this way the interpretation of the ‘in camera’ rule, which was devised to protect the rights and welfare of children, is clearly not acting in their best interests.

In her letter the Ombudsman for Children has advised the Taoiseach that the application of the ‘in camera’ rule can vary significantly.

Emily Logan, Ombudsman for Children, commented:

“My Office’s experience with the operation of the ‘in camera’ rule in the context of carrying out statutory investigations has varied from full and open disclosure of information to the refusal to disclose important documentation which hinders the progress of an investigation in a timely manner.

“It has been reported that the Government is currently considering the possibility of legislative change in order to allow the Independent Group to overcome the obstacles that currently hinder its access to information relating to the deaths of children in care since 2000.

“I would urge the Government to consider the application of the ‘in camera’ rule more generally as part of this process. We must ensure that the rule is flexible enough to allow reasonable access to information, where such access would serve the public interest, while ensuring that adequate safeguards are in place to respect the rights of children and the privacy of the parties.

This matter must be addressed as the current approach is not serving the best interests of children.

Ends

Note to Editors:

Section 8 of the Ombudsman for Children Act 2002 provides that the Office of the Ombudsman for Children can examine complaints against public bodies, schools and voluntary hospitals where an action taken by or on behalf of such a body has or may have adversely affected a child, and where the action was or may have been the result of maladministration.

Section 7(4) of the Ombudsman for Children Act 2002 provides that the Office of the Ombudsman for Children can advise Ministers of Government on any matter relating to the rights and welfare of children, including the probable effect of proposals for legislation.

The open administration of justice is an important principle enshrined in the Constitution and echoed in the European Convention on Human Rights. The ‘in camera’ rule in family and child care cases is an exception to that general rule, which was intended to be applied in a proportionate manner in order to protect individual rights rather than to shroud court processes and institutions in absolute secrecy.

Contact: Aoife Greene at 01 865 6810

• 28 May 2010
• Type: Press Release
• Topic: Family Law