Mr McCullough said there were points in Ms Lee’s case which do not conflict with the commission’s report when “read fairly as a whole”. Ms Lee’s submission that it “isn’t good enough” to blame the treatment of the women in the homes on the societal morals of the time, is a “simple difference of view” between her and the findings of the report.
Both women say they are readily identifiable in the final report, despite not being named, triggering a requirement, under section 34 of the Act, for the commission to provide them with the draft report so they could make submissions on it, including on the treatment of their evidence.The State denies the claims and points to the independence of the commission and the scale and complexity of the materials it had to consider.
Mr McCullough said Ms Harney’s objection to the report’s treatment of the experiences of people who were boarded out concerns a “difference of emphasis” rather than a breach of fair procedure. Ms Harney was born in Cork’s Bessborough mother and baby home and was boarded out between 1951 and 1954. Mr McCullough said a finding in favour of the applicants on section 34 of the 2004 Act would have “dramatic consequences” for the running of inquiries. He submitted that it was the intention of the Act that provisional copies be sent only to people against whom allegations are made or whose good name is at risk, which, he said, would not include the applicants.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: thejournal_ie - 🏆 32. / 50 Read more »
Source: thejournal_ie - 🏆 32. / 50 Read more »