Neither the Minister for Justice nor the Attorney General was personally aware of the move to have the law on statutory rape struck down, although the Department of Justice was informed of it in late 2002, the Dáil was told.
Tánaiste Mary Harney made the revelation during renewed exchanges with Opposition leaders who challenged her on Michael McDowell's role in the controversy.
Ms Harney conceded there was "an information deficit", adding: "In November and December 2002, the Department of Justice was informed by the Chief State Solicitor's office that this action was being taken, but there was no information thereafter."
Even if the Government had changed the law at the outset of the proceedings, she said, it would not have had retrospective effect. "That is the reality."
Challenged later to say if she believed the Minister for Justice's version of events, Ms Harney said: "Of course, I believe the Minister. Neither the Minister nor the Attorney General [ Rory Brady] had any personal knowledge of this case."
Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny asked if the Government had agreed to the Minister's proposal to reduce the age of consent for girls from 17 to 16. "I put her on notice that my party does not support the proposal. The immediate priority is to plug the gap in the law that now exists. The broader debate can be left to another day." Ms Harney said no decision had been made on consent or the detail of the legislation.
She knew of no government that had legislation ready to be implemented because a matter was before the High Court or Supreme Court. "We won the case in the High Court, and it was not anticipated that it would be lost in the Supreme Court."
Mr Kenny accused the Government of being "a headless band of bunglers". The people, he added, did not elect the Director of Public Prosecutions or the Attorney General but did elect the Minister.
"Do the department or the Minister for Justice, to whom we are all knee-high in political contribution terms, not read The Irish Times, which reported this on July 13th last year?
"Does the Minister not read the Law Society Gazette, in which a trainee solicitor pointed out in October of last year that this matter must be dealt with?"
He said it was incredible "that the AG, whose office was dealing with this along with the DPP, who sits at Cabinet and is in constant contact with the Government, especially the Minister for Justice, would not be aware that this case was proceeding through the Supreme Court and that the Government, on the basis that the Supreme Court would come to this decision, would not have emergency legislation ready to plug the loophole in the law for the future".
Asking if the Minister for Justice knew what was going on, Mr Kenny said that on television on Tuesday night, Mr McDowell had said that the DPP continued to lay charges under section 1 (1) of the 1935 Act until recent weeks.
"In the High Court on Monday, however, during the hearing of Mr A's case, the court was told the DPP had not sought to proceed with statutory rape indictments and trials had been stayed by consent since last summer pending last week's judgment.
"The court was told that on Monday, but the Tánaiste is defending the Minister for Justice who says there was no need for serious legislation, there was no gaping hole in the legal system and that he did not know what was going on."
Labour leader Pat Rabbitte said the public was staggered by the incompetence and lack of care displayed by Government. "If the Minister did not know, he ought to have known. Charles Clarke did not know either and he is kicking his heels on the backbenches now."
Ms Harney said: "The carriage of this case was jointly between the AG and the DPP."
Mr Rabbitte claimed this represented another correction of Mr McDowell. "The Minister plainly said yesterday evening that the carriage of this case was the responsibility of the DPP. He said he knew nothing about it, that the AG personally knew nothing about it and that he could not say if people in the AG's office knew about it."
