Sir, - Senator Mary Henry (September 12th) has highlighted the need for reform of the family law courts in order to restore confidence in the system, especially among fathers.
She makes the very sensible solution that there should be reporting of family law cases in the same way as we had reporting by Nell McCafferty from the children's court for many years. Such coverage has a salutary effect on the behaviour of judges, barristers, solicitors and social workers.
There is an important distinction between privacy and secrecy. Privacy means that the names and any identifying details of the spouses and their children are protected. Secrecy means that the system is protected, that there is no public scrutiny of the conduct of the courts, that legislators have no information on how family law legislation is working or what reforms might be needed, that there is little consistency in judgments, and that separating or divorcing couples are in the dark about the likely outcomes of a family court hearing.
The Irish courts offer examples of both. In rape trials the in camera rule protects the privacy of the parties but reporters regularly cover such trials without identifying the parties. In family law hearings, no information of any kind can be reported.
In a recent judgment, Mr Justice Roderick Murphy ruled that even the decree of divorce was an in camera document which could not be used to bring a complaint against a barrister, even though the Barristers' Tribunal meets in private and enjoins privacy on both parties.
Such secrecy is not in the public interest. - Yours, etc.,
Bob McCormack, Iveragh Road, Dublin 9.