Northern Ireland’s Justice Minister, Naomi Long, has opted not to appeal a court decision that invalidated a law providing anonymity for suspected sex offenders.
In May, a judge ruled that the Justice (Sexual Offences and Trafficking Victims) Act (Northern Ireland) 2022, which came into effect in 2023, was incompatible with human rights and press freedom. The law granted lifetime anonymity, and 25 years posthumously, to suspects who were not charged with any sexual offences. Media organizations had challenged the law, seeking to have sections of it declared legally invalid.
Initially, Long had considered appealing the judgment on constitutional grounds. However, she noted that other political parties did not share her concern about the constitutional implications of the ruling. In a written statement to the assembly, Long explained that her legal advice indicated that the ruling would significantly impact the legislative scrutiny process and the functioning of executive ministers and departments.
Long expressed that these potential effects extended beyond her department and the specific piece of legislation in question. She was advised that, without a challenge, the ability of any department to defend similar future assembly legislation would be “significantly compromised.”
Despite her initial inclination to appeal based on constitutional grounds, Long sought the views of her executive colleagues. She indicated that she would consider their responses before proceeding. However, the feedback from Sinn Féin, the DUP, and Ulster Unionists showed that these parties did not share her concerns about the broader implications of the ruling.
Given that her primary reason for considering an appeal was the wider constitutional impact, Long decided not to proceed with the appeal. This decision was based on the collective responses from the other parties and the legal advice she received.
By deciding against the appeal, Long has acknowledged the court’s ruling and the constitutional considerations highlighted by the judgment. This development underscores the complexities of balancing legal protections for individuals with broader human rights and press freedom considerations.