TD points to ‘void in law’ in relation to paedophiles

A Reform Alliance TD has claimed a “void in the law” in relation to sex abusers may have led a school principal to notify parents about a paedophile living in their area.

It was reported yesterday that the principal of a Dublin national school had written to parents warning them that a convicted paedophile had moved into their area and advising them to reiterate to their children the dangers of talking to strangers.

It had been reported that, under current laws, gardaí could tell schools if a dangerous sex offender is in their area and recommend that the school inform parents.

However, according to Supt David Taylor of the Garda Press Office, gardaí do not have any powers to alert people to where paedophiles are living.

He also said it could cause difficulties if such information was shared particularly given the risk of vigilantism

Supt Taylor said gardaí have a dedicated unit in Harcourt St which closely works with the HSE and which monitors the offenders.

He said officers check in with convicted sex offenders regularly to ensure they are adhering to the requirements placed upon them.

In fact the superintendent said, depending on the perceived risk, offenders might be spoken to every day or sometimes twice a day.

Supt Taylor said gardaí worked closely with schools through schemes like the Stay Safe programme to ensure children were aware of the dangers posed by strangers.

However, Reform Alliance TD Denis Naughten questioned whether the law was strong enough to protect children from the risk posed by sex offenders. In reference to the letters sent out by the Dublin school principal, he said: “The one thing that jumps to mind is that this is what happens when you have a void in the law. People take the law into their own hands.”

However, Áine Lynch of the National Parents Council questioned the value of relying on information provided about a particular offender.

She said other countries had lists of people who posed a risk to children, but that could give a false sense of security that those not on the list were safe when, in reality, children still needed to be aware of the danger posed by unnamed adults who could be dangerous.