It is high time the "stunningly draconian" libel laws damaging the media were replaced, according to journalism professionals and academics. They want the Taoiseach to deliver the new Defamation Bill he promised nearly two years ago.
While the violence which threatens journalists in many countries does not generally exist here, despite the murder of Veronica Guerin, there are other more insidious challenges proving more difficult to tackle, according to media profession als.
"Press freedom means many things," said Mr Frank Cullen, director of the National Newspapers of Ireland, representing the State's daily and Sunday papers.
"The World Association of Newspapers is talking about killings. Here we're suffering from laws which are really repressive and completely archaic," he said.
"They have been stated to be so by the Law Reform Commission and the Government's own Commission on the Newspaper Industry. It's high time the matter was addressed."
The legal framework governing the press is unchanged since the 1961 Act, which itself is based on the British law passed in 1952. As long ago as 1991, the Law Reform Commission, chaired by the now Chief Justice, Mr Ronan Keane, said the 1961 Act should be repealed and replaced with a new Act.
Despite a statement by the Government-appointed Commission on the Newspaper Industry in 1996 that essential changes in the law of libel were "a matter of urgency", there is still no sign of the reformed legislation which the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, told the Dail in November 1999 would be ready by the end of that year.
Mr Michael Foley, lecturer in journalism in the Dublin Institute of Technology, said the press in Ireland was under pressure from two sources: the legal environment and the contraction of ownership structures. "We have got used to the libel laws, so people think editors are just grumbling about what they can't print, but it's far more serious than that.
"I did some work in Eastern Europe and their press laws look healthy on paper, but then you look at their libel laws, and how they are used in such a way as to restrict the press. Ireland is to some extent in the same league as some of those countries."
The result, he feels, is either a very cautious press or the growing tabloidisation where papers print more frivolous, but "safe" stories about celebrities.
The media industry has offered a quid pro quo to entice the Government to move on the reforms. In a joint statement in February 1998, the National Union of Journalists and the NNI supported a wholly independent ombudsman to provide an inexpensive tier of protection to people who felt aggrieved. They even offered to fund it.
Mr Cullen explains he thinks the Government is dragging its heels "because of the day-to-day tensions and the role the media plays. Many in the legal and political profession have gained substantially from the libel laws, it's somewhat of a gravy train," he said.
Mr Niall Meehan, head of the journalism and media department at Griffith College, Dublin, agrees. "It still remains the case that libel is a lottery in the hands of the rich and powerful," he said. The recent case taken by Ms Beverley Cooper-Flynn against RTE is pointed to. "Is that justice, that someone who feels aggrieved should have to pay £2 million?" asked Mr Cullen.