The Ombudsman for Children will tell members of the Oireachtas today that she has serious concerns over plans to introduce an offence of strict liability relating to sex with minors.
The proposed change to the Constitution would allow for the introduction of a law that would automatically make it a criminal offence to have sex with a person under 18 years of age and rule out a defence of "honest mistake" over a person's age.
Emily Logan, who is due to appear at the Joint Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution today, will tell members that a strict liability law will not meet its main aim of protecting children from hostile cross-examination in courtroom proceedings.
In a submission to the committee, she says that children have to give evidence for other types of sexual crime in court, including familial abuse and rape.
"We need to protect all children coming before the courts. Some measures have already been introduced here to protect children, including video evidence. We need to make sure these are available to all children," Ms Logan says.
In addition, she points out that there is a possibility that children under 18 engaged in consensual sexual relations could be prosecuted for strict liability offences.
Ms Logan's contribution marks a growing unease among children's rights campaigners over plans to introduce a strict liability offence - a measure that had much wider support when it was proposed a year ago. Such an move, however, is strongly advocated by support groups who work with rape victims.
Growing pressure on the Government in the aftermath of the "C" case led to plans to change the Constitution in order to introduce an offence of strict liability. The case involved a 23-year-old man who had sex with a 14-year-old girl. His conviction was deemed unconstitutional as it did not allow a defence of "honest mistake" as to a girl's age.
Ms Logan will also call on politicians to amend existing plans to change the Constitution by including an express statement of the rights of the child. These would include the right to participate in matters affecting the child, the right to freedom from discrimination, and the right to family or appropriate care.
While the strengthening of children's rights has raised fears in some quarters that it will lead to greater State "intrusion" into families, Ms Logan says many families want greater support. Her office, she says, has been contacted by families of children with disabilities living in chronic and stressful situations needing supports from a range of agencies to meet their children's extensive needs. "They have expressed deep concerns and fear that the State would only intervene in a pro-active but disproportionate manner when the situation has become so critical that the State may deem that they have 'failed' as parents," she says.
"Such late interventions are not in the best interests of the children and may be avoidable if adequate and proportionate supports are provided by the State to those families at an early stage."
She says the best approach is the delivery of early support in a proportionate manner with a view to limiting more extensive interventions to cases where such action is clearly required.
"What we need to do is develop a system of State care and support where families are supported from the first moment that the need for such support is evident."