Sir, – RTÉ broadcaster Bryan Dobson interviewed RTÉ Director General, Noel Curran, on November 22nd on the Government inquiry into RTÉ’s handling of the Fr Reynolds defamation case. Mr Curran stated that “(A)nything that helped restore trust and confidence in RTÉ’s current affairs and Irish journalism was welcome” and that “the Government was perfectly within their rights to do this” and that “RTÉ has a good working relationship with the BAI” (the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland) the agency designated by the Government to investigate RTÉ.
I would concur that there is a good working relationship between the two organisations; but perhaps too good. I complained to the BAI on October 7th about the programme when the paternity test was negative. The reply I received included the following statement: “In order for a complaint to be valid it must be made within 30 days of the date of broadcast. The broadcast in question was aired on 23 May, 2011. Therefore, due to the time lapse, we cannot process a complaint on your behalf.”
However, I could not have complained any sooner as the paternity test result was made public only then. The fact that people have been charged 40 years after alleged abuse, and yet a viewer/listener has only 30 days to make a complaint against a broadcast says it all. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – On May 24th 2011, after watching the now discredited Mission to Prey,the Minister for Justice, Alan Shatter, was out of the traps like a greyhound with the following condemnatory statement: "I share the widespread public concern and disgust at the revelations which the programme contained . . . I have been in touch with the Garda Commissioner about this matter who, of course, shares my concern at the revelations in the programme . . . People are entitled to be assured that we are doing everything open to us to counteract this evil."
For Mr Shatter, who is a solicitor and the Minister for Justice, to call allegations revelations raises very serious questions about his competence both as a solicitor and, especially as the Minister for Justice in a Republic which is supposed to treat all its citizens equally.
Fr Reynolds’s good name was vindicated in the High Court on November 17th, 2011. As far as I am aware, Mr Shatter has not personally apologised to him for the comments which caused Fr Reynolds, his family, friends and parishioners enormous stress and pain.
Since the High Court decision, the journalists and producers associated with making the programme have stepped down. Why should the same rule not apply to a politician? Could it be that there is one law for politicians and another for the rest of us? – Yours, etc,