Sinn Féin spokesperson on Children, Claire Kerrane TD, has said that a significant change to legal representation for children in child care court proceedings remains ‘unexplained’.
The new Guardian ad Litem National Service proposes that a Guardian ad Litem (acting for a child) in child care court proceedings is not guaranteed legal representation.
Speaking having attending a briefing she requested with representatives from the new Guardian ad Litem (GAL) National Service with the Committee on Children, Kerrane said:
“I have serious concerns, having engaged with Guardians ad Litem and their representative organisation AGALI, on the new GAL National Service being established.
“I raised some of these concerns with those involved with the new National Service, including the Head GAL during today’s briefing and as I said at the end of that meeting, I am not satisfied with the change to legal representation and the ‘non-rationale’ for same, in my view.
“I see no reason why Guardians ad Litem would no longer have guaranteed legal representation, when acting on behalf of a child, in expressing their wishes in court. In fact, this proposed change flies in the face of the Departments’ contention that the child is central and their voice is paramount in these cases.
“There appears to be some notion that Guardians ad Litem are using legal representation unnecessarily – that is my feeling on what is being suggested. And as I said to the representatives today, there is nothing in it for Guardians ad Litem to have legal representation – only of benefit to the child they are advocating for.
“It was suggested today that where there was no legal representation and if a GAL was ‘having difficulties in court’ it could be revisited – this is ridiculous and does not serve the child’s best interests in any way, shape or form.
“Nobody, including practising GALs have an issue with oversight, Garda Vetting and so on, a National Service can play a role in those matters, but there is nothing good in this for any child when it comes to stripping the person who is their voice (the GAL) from legal representation, leaving that decision up to the minister of the day.
“This will see children and their GAL, some of whom may never have stood in a courtroom in their lives, possibly facing several legal representatives on the other side with no legal representation of their own, there is no rationale for this and nothing good will come of it for children in this state.
“This proposal, for one, needs to be removed.”
