The Laffoy Commission, which is inquiring into abuse in institutions since the 1940s, has ruled it is not precluded from publishing the names of institutions in which abuse occurred or the perpetrators of the abuse, be they alive or dead.
In a provisional ruling issued yesterday, the commission said fairness and justice may require that institutions and individuals be identified.
"A general finding that abuse occurred, say, in the 1950s in a particular type of institution known to be under investigation would be unfair to institutions of that type in respect of which there was no evidence of abuse in that period and to the personnel associated with those institutions," it said.
"A finding that boys were sexually abused in a particular institution, say, during the 1960s, without naming the perpetrator where it is possible to do so, would be unfair to personnel working in the institution during that period against whom no allegations of such abuse were made," the commission added.
Legal representatives for a number of alleged abusers and institutions where abuse was alleged to have occurred challenged the commission's powers to publish findings of abuse against a named person who was deceased or the institution the person worked in.
They also argued that a lapse of time since abuse allegedly occurred meant living persons would be gravely hampered in their ability to defend themselves and, therefore, should also not be named, nor should their institution be named.
The commission said: "This committee rejects the submission that identifying institutions and personnel who worked in, managed or regulated institutions is a minor aspect of its functions. On the contrary, the manifest intention of the Oireachtas is that it should be an integral part of the inquiry.
"The determinations which this committee is required to make of their nature necessitate identifying the perpetrator of abuse, the institution in which the abuse occurred, and the persons, or group of persons, or corporations involved in the management and administration of the institutions and the persons or organisations charged with their regulation."
In relation to the argument that alleged abusers could be prejudiced in defending themselves due to the lapse of time since the abuse allegedly occurred, the commission said it would not rule on this until it had conducted a preliminary investigation of each allegation, obtained discovery and production of all relevant documentation, and heard all relevant evidence.
To do otherwise would be "an abrogation" of its mandate, it said. It would, it added, exercise "a high degree of caution" in coming to its decisions.
The 57-page ruling follows the holding of four hearings in July, some in public.
The commission said it was now, in light of its experience to date, reviewing the procedures it has adopted in processing and conducting its hearings in relation to allegations of abuse.
Meanwhile, parties who were not represented at the July hearings may make submissions in writing on the commission's provisional ruling before October 4th.