A solicitor specialising in representing child abuse victims has warned that Government proposals to "cherry pick" cases for investigation may create serious child protection issues.
Mr Michael Lanigan, who represents former residents from a number of institutions, said yesterday the Laffoy commission had received serious allegations against people who may still be working with children. "The fall-out could be considerable," he told The Irish Times.
"There are 1,800 statements with all sorts of allegations sitting there, and these do not just relate to the distant past. Some of the allegations relate to alleged events in the 1980s."
According to Mr Lanigan, it is likely that there are allegations against people who are still involved in childcare or work with children.
"It is not sufficient to take a straw poll. At the very minimum each statement has to be examined. Essentially you can't start a process like this and not finish it.
"These are very serious allegations, and it is not unreasonable that some of the accused are still within the system."
Meanwhile a lawyer for victims of abuse in residential institutions accused the Government of scuppering the Laffoy commission.
Mr James McGuill, who represents a number of the victims, said yesterday: "The church and the State between them have succeeded in scuppering the inquiry."
One of the major issues now was that there would be no full investigation into what happened, and therefore no recommendations about avoiding it in the future, he said.
He claimed there had been "practical obstruction" from the Department of Education on every single issue that came up. "Every issue was a pitched battle," he said.
"The Taoiseach made a very public apology to the victims, but it had no practical effect. The Government did not give the judge the support she deserved. They did not want their conduct scrutinised. You can't have an inquiry resourced by the people being inquired into."
Mr McGuill said many of his clients were now in a very difficult position. "There will be a substantial number of people who can't have their cases heard in court because they are statute-barred. They've made their initial statements, and prepared themselves for this inquiry, and now it's not going ahead.
"It was very rehabilitative for people to be able to go and give their accounts of what happened and be believed, and know they were not guilty."
He said the issues of length of time and expense, raised by Mr Dempsey when he announced a review of the commission, could have been dealt with.
"Many of the cases could have been grouped together according to the institution involved. The commission was given the power to sit in four divisions, so four sittings could take place at the same time, but it never got the resources for that. If the orders met the complaints in a non-meritorious way they would not get their costs."
Mr McGuill said he would be making representations to the Government on what his clients now needed.