JEFFREY DONALDSON HAS been found guilty of multiple sexual offences against two women when they were children.
The former DUP leader was remanded into custody after a jury at Newry Crown Court found him guilty of 18 offences, including rape, indecent assault and gross indecency, which took place between 1985 and 2008.
He is due to be sentenced on 25 September, with judge Paul Ramsey telling the court that a “lengthy” prison term was inevitable.
When Donaldson was charged with historical sexual offences on 28 March 2024, his name appeared in the media almost immediately.
If he had been charged in the Republic of Ireland, this would not have been the case.
Reporting the identity of those charged with a sexual offence is treated differently under the respective laws in Northern Ireland and in the Republic.
Kevin Brown is a professor of criminal law at Queen’s University Belfast. He told The Journal that there is no general rule that a person charged with a sexual offence in Northern Ireland is entitled to anonymity.
“Once a person has been charged, the ordinary principle of open justice applies. This means that the accused can generally be named, subject to any specific reporting restrictions imposed by the court and, importantly, subject to the continuing anonymity of the complainant,” he said.
Complainants in sexual offence cases in the north have automatic statutory anonymity, which prevents the publication of material that would be likely to identify them. This generally lasts for their lifetime and for 25 years after their death.
Asked if defendants can request anonymity, Brown said a defendant could seek a reporting restriction, but there is no automatic entitlement to anonymity simply because the case involves sexual offences, is high-profile, or may be damaging to reputation.
“Any application would have to be justified by recognised legal grounds, such as protecting the complainant’s anonymity, avoiding a substantial risk of prejudice to the administration of justice, or protecting other fundamental rights in genuinely exceptional circumstances,” he said.
“Given the strength of the open justice principle, such an order would not be granted lightly.”
On the laws in the Republic of Ireland, Brown said the difference is that it has a post-charge accused anonymity model – or, it provides anonymity for accused persons until they are convicted.
“In practical terms, a defendant charged with a sexual offence may ordinarily be named in Northern Ireland, whereas an equivalent accused person in the Republic may not be named unless and until convicted, or unless an exception applies.”
Ireland’s Criminal Law (Rape) Act of 1981 prohibits the identification of a person accused or charged with committing a sexual offence prior to conviction.
The law contains a section called Anonymity of Accused, which states:
“After a person is charged with a rape offence, no matter likely to lead members of the public to identify him as the person against whom the charge is made shall be published in a written publication available to the public or be broadcast.”
This means that media outlets cannot publish identifiable information about the suspect.
James MacGuill SC, a solicitor and managing partner of MacGuill and Company Solicitors, told The Journal: ”In our jurisdiction, you’re entitled to anonymity until you’re convicted.
“Even after conviction in certain cases, you can’t be named if you being named in some way identifies the person against whom the crime was committed.”
In this instance, the law stipulates that those accused of rape can be publicly identified if the victim waives his/her right to anonymity and the trial judge allows the accused’s identity to be made known.
MacGuill was critical of the law in the north, where, he said, “all crime is the same and you name people simply by virtue of them being charged”.
“I think most practitioners see the huge injustice that that causes, and we would prefer that nobody was named in any offence until convicted,” he said.
“If you’re charged with a crime, but you’re not convicted, your name is still public, and people don’t necessarily appreciate the difference between being charged and being convicted.”
He also pointed to a “further anomaly” where someone who has been found guilty of a crime and named successfully appeals their conviction. “You win your appeal, but your name is still out there.”