Independent review of mother and baby home testimony abandoned by government

The Government has abandoned plans for a promised independent review of testimony given by mother and baby home survivors, the Irish Examiner has reported.

Children’s Minister Roderic O’Gorman announced in June of 2021 his intention to propose that Cabinet appoints an international human rights expert to re-examine the written testimony given to the Mother and Baby Homes Commission, and report back this year.

This came after survivors and academics raised concerns about how testimony provided to the confidential committee was handled.

An independent examination of the testimony given by hundreds of survivors was called for after a member of the commission of investigation revealed that these intensely personal stories had been discounted because they were provided in private and not under oath.

While Mr O'Gorman did draft a memo looking to appoint an international expert, it never progressed any further. A spokesperson for the Minister has confirmed that he now has no plans to take this any further.

A Freedom of Information (FoI) request revealed that the supposed "draft outline" of a proposed memorandum for Government on June 14 of 2021 was as far as the review progressed. The refused FoI requested all records relating to the establishment of the independent review, which resulted in a total of eight records between June and December 2021.

June 14 2021 saw the start of an email thread between "Advisor, Sec Gen and PO re draft outline of proposed Memo for Government", described as "an early draft of a document created for the purpose of enabling the Minister to bring proposals to Government for consideration." The proposal wasn't mentioned again for the entire duration of 2021.

The only remaining documents concerning this topic revolve around a speaking note prepared for Taoiseach Micheál Martin on June 14, a few email threads on "policy approaches to ongoing deliberations by the Minister on potential policy approaches on which a final decision has not been made" on December 7, and a response to a media query on December 8.

Approximately 500 survivors gave evidence confidentially to the committee, with commission member Professor Mary Daly admitting after the fact that the testimony given was not weighed the same as other information - as anything the main report of the commission contained had to "meet robust legal standards of evidence".

The commission heard testimony from a smaller number of people separately and under oath.

A spokesperson for the Department of Children relayed that Mr O’Gorman was aware of the "deep hurt" the report of the confidential committee had caused and had listened to the "concerns and disappointment" of survivors when the report did not live up to expectations.

"Although care was taken in the design of the confidential committee component to try and allow the truth as survivors wanted it told to emerge, the minister recognises that this has not happened for very many of them.

"The minister has been keen to address these concerns and had previously indicated the possibility of a review of the testimony offered to the confidential committee.

"Having considered the matter, the minister believes that a new initiative to support survivors to tell their personal story, so that it can be formally recorded and accepted as part of the official record, provides the best opportunity for responding to the concerns of survivors in a meaningful way."

According to this spokesperson, survivors will be able to come forward to tell their personal story or have the testimony of the confidential committee used in the planned National Centre for Research and Remembrance. This centre is set to be located on Sean McDermott Street, Dublin City, on the site of the former Magdalene laundry.

Reactions to this news have been all over social media, with prominent activist and academic Claire McGettrick speaking out on Twitter. "Instead of a review of a Commission that breached witnesses' statutory rights (as agreed by govt in the High Court), people are expected to give evidence (again) to a Dept that's explicitly treating such *evidence* as 'personal stories' from the outset," McGettrick said.

Actor, writer, director, and adoption rights activist Noelle Brown said: "Giving testimony to the Confidential Committee in 2017 was a miserable, humiliating experience. The Commission's report was insulting and hurt survivors, but hey this government has the version of our history to keep the Church happy."

The Irish Council for Civil Liberties also conveyed their dismay in a statement, saying: "Government should reverse this decision. Survivors were devastated by the treatment of their testimony by the MBH Commission and vindicated by the High Court's finding last December. They deserve more.

"Government has a legal obligation to effectively investigate Human Rights abuses and Roderic O'Gorman's new initiative is one that shies away from human rights obligations. It also flies in the face of survivors' rights.

"This summer as part of their review of Ireland's human rights record, the UN HR Committee made strong recommendations for how Ireland should address the abuses in the MBHs. The committee's recommendations were: First, the government should 'ensure the full recognition of the violation of human rights of all victims in these institutions, and establish a transitional justice mechanism to fight impunity and guarantee the right to truth for all victims.'

"The government should also 'intensify its efforts to increase complaint mechanisms for victims and to raise their awareness in order to investigate all allegations of abuses thoroughly taking a human-rights, survivor-centred and trauma-informed approach' and 'prosecute suspected perpetrators where appropriate and, if convicted, punish them with penalties commensurate with the gravity of the offence.'

"This decision to abandon the independent review of testimony is entirely at odds with these recommendations, avoids the recognition of human rights violations, and is at odds with the spirit of transitional justice. It also violates the right to truth.

"We are also concerned about this new initiative’s risk of re-traumatising victims by 'inviting' them to once again share their story with no legal repercussions for the state or any further scrutiny for the harm that they are being asked to recount.

"From the beginning we have been calling for a survivor-centred approach. Government must do more to meets its obligations."