ANALYSIS: It's a wonder Miss Justice Laffoy did not resign as chairwoman of the commission into child abuse sooner, writes Patsy McGarry.
Many would have felt two weeks ago that the publication of Mr Justice Ryan's recommendations for change in his review of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse would have rendered redundant yesterday's third interim report from his predecessor as chair of the commission, Miss Justice Mary Laffoy. Not so.
Mr Justice Ryan's review has shown a way forward, but Miss Justice Laffoy has raised very serious questions about the past behaviour of some in church and State where the commission is concerned.
For instance, what has been going on at the Department of Education and Science? Why is it stonewalling in supplying relevant documentation to a statutory body - the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse - which is also under its own aegis?
And what is its position in law now that it has been so slow to comply fully with a direction from that commission's Investigation Commission, made in March of last year, to supply such documentation?
The Department has admitted involving 14 lawyers and 35 officials, at a cost of €650,000, in preparing what was deemed an inadequate response last June to the committee's order for discovery. It has been given until February 28th to comply fully with the direction.
What is even more significant in all of this is that the documentation being sought relates directly to the deal agreed in June 2002 between the previous minister for education, Dr Michael Woods, and 18 religious congregations who had been involved in running residential institutions.
Under its terms they agreed to pay over €128 million to the State redress fund, and in turn were indemnified against any future compensation claims by former residents of the institutions.
Having heard Dr Woods and his spokespeople justify the deal in the media by saying that the State had a responsibility for these institutions, in July 2002 the committee sought discovery of all relevant documents from the Department upon which conclusions were reached as to the culpability of the State and regulatory authorities for abuse in the institutions, and "which were reflected in the agreement" between the congregations and the Minister.
In October 2002, 457 documents were supplied by the Department to the committee. Of these "less than 300" were found to be relevant, Miss Justice Laffoy said.
In her interim report yesterday, she concluded that "consideration of the documents discovered suggests that there is little contemporaneous documentation held by the Department evidencing the existence or possible existence of abuse in industrial schools and reformatory schools during the period with which the Commission is concerned, other than general and medical inspection reports.
"In particular, no record of contemporaneous knowledge of sexual abuse by a person in authority is revealed."
Is it the case that Dr Woods claimed a liability for the State, following his deal with the congregations, for which there is no evidence? It is what she suggests.
Only in one instance, noted Miss Justice Laffoy, was there disclosure by the Department of contemporaneous reporting by management of an industrial school of an instance of sexual abuse of pupils by a person in authority.
In January 2003, the committee became aware of this case and investigated it. It discovered the Department of Education had been informed about it in 1980 and 1996 directly. The committee queried why they had not previously received documents relevant to this case among records made available by the Department.
The Department's explanation was that "no discovery direction had been made in relation to the institution in question during the period in question and that, in responding to statements in relation to the institution, current files were not checked", Miss Justice Laffoy said in her report.
Then there are the religious congregations themselves, who she found were challenging everything, even matters "of indisputable historic fact". She exempts the Rosminian Institute from these criticisms and the Presentation Brothers.
Brother Edmund Garvey, of the Christian Brothers, has disputed Miss Justice Laffoy's opinion in this matter. He said they have "co-operated fully", and had submitted 700 responses, "not one of which has been dealt with". He felt the criticisms were not fair where they were concerned, and pointed to recent High Court findings "which justified many of our concerns where procedures of the Committee were concerned".
Generally, it is clear from yesterday's report that the treatment of Miss Justice Laffoy, the other commission members, and survivors by elements of church, State and some in the legal profession has been a scandal in itself. The wonder is not that she resigned as chair of the commission last September, but that she did not do so sooner. The wonder, indeed, is that other commission members stayed on.