A MAN jailed for child porn offences cannot be identified because publicity could lead him to commit suicide, a High Court judge ruled yesterday.
In an unprecedented case he was granted an injunction based on medical evidence which established the risk to be real and immediate.
A judge held that the right to life completely trumped any freedom of expression rights of the press.
The man, described only as ZY in proceedings, is serving a 21-month sentence imposed last December for offences including blackmail and having indecent images of children.
He secured a temporary injunction at the time after some reporting restrictions were lifted at the end of the criminal case.
His lawyers then sought a permanent order restraining any disclosure of his identity in an action against court reporter Paul Higgins.
The Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunal Service became a second defendant in the case involving privacy law and the Article 2 right to life under European legislation.
It was the first case of its kind to deal with the predictive level of suicide risk, rather than examining issues following a death.
According to the man’s legal team, medical evidence showed that naming him publicly could trigger an attempt to take his own life. The level of threat was assessed as being immense, the court heard.
Details were revealed of a previous attempt to commit suicide in 2010 following an earlier arrest.
Psychiatric reports referred to ZY having zero ambition and thoughts of hanging himself. He claimed he could see no future and did not want to go on after fearing he would be named.
Barrister Tony McGleenan QC contended that his client’s state of mind was directly linked to the threat of being identified after conviction.
Olivia O’Kane, appearing for Mr Higgins, urged the judge to dismiss the case, claiming it had been wrongly brought against a private individual.
She also stressed the potential consequences for open justice, warning that sex offenders and murderers could try to stop their details being disclosed if anonymity was granted.
In a statement supplied to the court, her journalist client emphasised the huge public interest in reporting prosecutions of this kind.
Ruling on the case, Mr Justice McCloskey acknowledged the “undeniable” rights of the press.
But he found that the medical evidence demonstrated that publicity could lead to suicide, with the risk both real and immediate.
The judge said: “The right to life is absolute. It has consistently been described as sacrosanct, fundamental, supreme and inviolable.”
He said that it must take precedence over all other claims.
“It’s difficult to conceive of any case where the right to freedom of expression would trump the right to life.”
Mr Justice McCloskey also pointed out that the principle of open justice must give way in the case.
Imposing a final and permanent ban on both the press and the Courts Service disclosing any of ZY’s details, he rejected claims that the order could open the floodgates to similar legal action.
“Unmeritorious convicted prisoners will gain nothing from this intensely fact-sensitive decision,” he stressed.
Following his verdict he refused an application to award costs against Mr Higgins, who received backing from the National Union of Journalists in defending the case.
The judge took into account the legitimate public interest arguments and the unparalleled aspects.
Making no order for costs, he pointed out: “I give some weight to the consideration that this case appears to be unprecedented in the evaluation of Article 2 jurisprudence.”
Comments