Ombudsman silent over age at which sex should be legal
Child watchdog declines to state position
‘Done a good bit of reading on this’
THE Office of the Children’s Ombudsman has failed to say if it agrees with the controversial view of the previous office holder that the sexual age of consent is ‘not realistic’ at 17.
In 2006, the former children’s ombudsman, Emily Logan, clashed with then children’s minister, the late Brian Lenihan, when discussing the sexual age of consent before an Oireachtas committee.
The Ombudsman’s office is currently backing the Government’s plans to cut the Digital Age of Consent – the point at which children can have their data exploited by billionaire tech firms – to its lowest possible level of 13.
The focus on the age limit of web-enabled devices such as smartphones comes after a number of horrific high-profile cases – including that of paedophile Matthew Horan, 26, who preyed on young girls online – and a concerted campaign by the Irish Daily Mail to legislate for an age restriction on smartphones.
Appearing before the Oireachtas Committee on Child Protection in 2006, Ms Logan, who is now chief commissioner of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, was asked for her views on the age at which young people are allowed to consent to sexual activity with each other. While this is currently set at 17 in Ireland, Ms Logan said she believed it was ‘not realistic or reflective of changes in society’. She declined to say what she thought the age should be.
Later, she said that adults’ subjective opinions on the issue of the age of consent should be avoided.
She said: ‘I am not going to say it should be 16 or 17 years, as it would be wrong of me to do so.
‘It would be giving the committee a subjective opinion and we should steer clear of adults’ subjective opinions on this issue.’
During the exchange, the ombudsman also said that she believed that children should not face legal repercussions if they have sex with each other. ‘It is my view that, in principle, young people should not be criminalised in respect of consensual behaviour among themselves,’ she said. ‘The key element is consent. Where there is consent, criminal proceedings should not be brought.’
However, Ms Logan’s views clashed with those of former minister Lenihan, who expressed his discomfort with the suggestion that children having sex under age should not face the possibility of legal proceedings.
He said: ‘Many in our society would not agree with that proposition. They would be concerned about the signal that would send to children,’ he said. ‘They believe there should be an absolute zone of protection where one says of children they are incapable of giving consent to any other person.’
He added: ‘Ms Logan stated she is against the criminalisation of children engaged in consensual sexual activity under a designated age. The effect of this is to suggest the child is capable of giving consent. The whole point of the law is to suggest the child is not capable of doing so.’
The Office of the Children’s Ombudsman failed to respond to questions from the Irish Daily Mail on Monday and yesterday on whether it agreed with Ms Logan’s views or what it believed the age that young people can consent to sexual activity should be set at.
A spokesman for the Department of Justice said yesterday that the issue of the age of sexual consent was considered by the Oireachtas during the passage of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act of 2017 but that it was decided to keep it at 17.
Yesterday, the Mail reported that the current Children’s Ombudsman, Niall Muldoon, is in favour of a digital age of consent of 13.
The digital age of consent is likely to go to a full Dáil vote this evening and the three main opposition parties – Fianna Fáil, Sinn Féin and Labour – have said they support raising it to 16.
At the opening stages of the Dáil debate on the amendment to raise the digital age of consent last night, Róisín Shortall of the Social Democrats performed a U-turn on her previous support for a higher age restriction.
When the Data Protection Bill was at committee stage recently, the co-leader of the Social Democrats was among the TDs who had tabled an amendment to raise it to 16, the highest available age option for the Government.
And she had said this move was in a bid to ‘ensure parents retain a right to decide what platforms are appropriate for their kids to access’. However, last night she backtracked on this.
Ms Shortall told the Dáil she had changed her mind after ‘listening to the arguments that were put on the day’ of the recent committee meeting and that she has since done ‘a good bit of reading on this’. She said she had received correspondence on the matter from some groups including the ISPCC and Barnardos.