Let miscreants get their dues and the public its money back

This week's calls to "name and shame" the folk on the Ansbacher list are ludicrous

This week's calls to "name and shame" the folk on the Ansbacher list are ludicrous. Not one of these people has so far been proved to have done anything illegal. Publishing their identities would have an unconscionable effect and set a dangerous precedent.

The effect would be that those who have legal action taken against them would be given a potential get-out clause. They would be able to argue they could not receive a fair trial if they were dragged into court.

However, there is a problem with using that option. People would assume that those who took advantage of it were guilty. "Sure, if they're innocent why don't they go to court and prove it?" There are lots of good reasons not to go to court. By their confrontational nature court cases involve a lot of accusations.

That would, in turn, be amplified by the complex nature of the cases. It might be possible to prove legally that nothing untoward happened, but it would be a different matter trying to explain that to anyone unfamiliar with company law and the intricacies of the tax system. Or the vast majority of the population, to put it another way.

READ MORE

And even if the Government went through with changing the law and published the names, the benefit would be negligible. The guilty would not be ashamed. They would be annoyed they got caught but it is unreasonable to assume they would feel embarrassed or guilty. If they were happy to do the rest of us out of vast quantities of tax revenue, why should they suddenly come over all conscience-stricken?

They would be delighted that their defence had been bolstered. And they would be only too happy to use the get-out clause because it might just save them a fortune, keep them out of jail and allow them to continue making money.

Given that the purpose of this whole process is to catch the offenders, get back the money they stole from us, and punish them for doing it, creating a scenario that might allow them to get away with it is nonsense.

And the innocent? Their reputations will be dented. Yes, they can get their names cleared, eventually, but this kind of mud has a way of leaving a mark. You can wash every last trace of it from your record but there is likely to be a stain that just won't go away no matter how much PR detergent is used on it. Publishing the names would have nothing to do with justice or fairness and would have a drastic effect on the innocent.

But, the argument goes, the people are livid and they want to know the truth.

The people are livid. But I don't believe they are so blinded by rage as to be incapable of waiting a relatively short time to see the list of names, particularly if that will help to ensure that the miscreants get their dues. And the public gets its money back.

I'm a little surprised we haven't seen an opinion poll indicating which option the people would prefer. And even if such a poll did demonstrate that the citizenry had plumped for the "name and possibly mildly embarrass" option the Government should not change its mind.

We are told the public wants to know who these people are. Of course we do. I'd love to know who's on that list. And to back this argument up we are being told that the people want to know the names because they believe that in some way these people will wriggle off the hook. That if the names aren't published right away they'll club together, exercise their influence and get the whole thing buried.

They won't. It just would not be possible to do that following the publicity that has surrounded this issue. Neither the public nor the media will allow that to happen. The level of coverage over the last week clearly indicates that this subject is just too interesting to let go of. It's a bit like VIP magazine in reverse. Rather than being invited into the houses of the rich and famous so we can tut-tut at their choice of curtains, we'll be able to poke around their bank accounts, look at the millions salted away and feel suitably virtuous that we never got quite that greedy ourselves.

The mere fact that this newspaper decided to go ahead with printing information it had been leaked shows just how keenly the story is being followed.

And, finally, there is the small matter of the cornerstone of our legal system. Justice in Ireland is administered on the principle that people are innocent until proven guilty. Calling for people to be named and shamed implies that because they have been named they are guilty of some offence.

So far, every person on that list is innocent in the eyes of the law.

Only when the Government has been advised that it is proper to do so can it even consider publishing the identities. What those who have access to the list need to do now is to ensure they avoid any mistakes. They need to be paranoid about ensuring that no further leaks occur, that every "i" is dotted and "t" crossed. They need to leave no loopholes open, leave no technicalities to be exploited.

Government needs to proceed quickly but not to rush. They need to catch the guilty, exonerate the innocent and ensure that this cannot happen again.