The public's right to know about serious wrongdoing outweighed a bank's duty to protect the confidentiality of its customers, the Supreme Court ruled yesterday. The landmark judgment was hailed last night as a significant advance for press freedom.
The court held that where journalists were investigating serious wrongdoing, which was of genuine interest and importance to the public, the public had a right to know.
The ruling, by a majority of three to two, arose from an injunction which had been obtained against RTE by National Irish Bank. In several televised reports RTE has claimed that it has information that NIB operated a scheme which attracted up to £30 million and enabled customers with "sensitive" accounts to put their money in offshore accounts for the purpose of evading tax. The bank wanted to prevent further disclosures.
The court decision was hailed last night as a significant advance for the cause of press freedom and investigative journalism. But the judgment also struck a cautionary note by reminding RTE that innocent bank customers could sue the station if they were defamed.
Some legal sources saw in that statement a welcome unwillingness by the court to contemplate prior restraint.
It was unclear last night whether RTE planned to name customers identified in bank documents which it is believed journalists have obtained. E that he could not say if he or Mr Charlie Bird, RTE's Special Correspondent, would be naming any names. Yesterday Mr Liam Miller, RTE's managing director for organisation and development, said RTE had never asserted that its stories concerning the bank were dependent on any names.
Mr Miller said the station was satisfied with the result. "We believed it was important to resist the restraint." A statement from RTE said the judgment "vindicates the rights of the media to investigate matters of important public interest".
The Irish secretary of the National Union of Journalists, Mr Eoin Ronayne, said the court appeared to have balanced two conflicting constitutional rights, the right to privacy and the right to freedom of expression, and "decided that in this case the latter right carried greater weight as the issue was of significance in the context of the public interest and the public's right to know."
The decision appeared to indicate that the judiciary was willing to recognise the media as a "watchdog for the public interest", he added.
The director of National Newspapers of Ireland, Mr Frank Cullen, said it was essential that the public's right to know was safeguarded at all times. "We therefore welcome the court's decision in support."
A statement from National Irish Bank said it was pleased the court had upheld the principle of customer confidentiality. "Tax-compliant investors in products sold by CMI (Clerical Medical Investments) through NIB in Ireland are entitled to confidentiality and to maintenance of their good name."