A JUDGE HAS ordered Gemma O’Doherty to appear before the High Court to answer her alleged refusal to obey an order not to harass the mother of a young man who died by suicide.

Justice Mark Sanfey made the ruling after being satisfied that O’Doherty had breached the terms of a court order and should come before the court on Friday morning to answer her alleged contempt.

The judge granted the order sought on behalf of Edel Campbell, who is suing O’Doherty over the use of an image of her late son, Diego Gilsenan, on a publication run by the defendant.

O’Doherty was not in court today when the application was made.

Last June, Edel Campbell’s lawyers obtained orders from the court against O’Doherty including an injunction restraining the defendant from harassing, intimidating or communicating with the plaintiff and her family.

Campbell, represented by David Kennedy SC, appearing with Paul Comiskey O’Keeffe Bl instructed by solicitor Ciaran Mulholland, claims the order has been breached on “numerous occasions” by O’Doherty.

It is claimed that in a series of video posts made by O’Doherty on dates in June, July, August and September of last year, and earlier this year, the defendant made statements in clear disregard and in breach of the injunction.

In his ruling, Justice Sanfey said it was very clear what the High Court had in mind when it granted the injunction against O’Doherty last June, which was to halt intimidation of Edel Campbell.

The judge said that O’Doherty, and comments posted on the Irish Light’s social media account, had made many references about her and the circumstances of the unfortunate death of her son.

The court heard that O’Doherty had stated that Edel Campbell was telling lies, made remarks about the plaintiff’s mental health, and had questions to answer about her son’s death.

Online posts allegedly from the Irish Light, a publication linked to the defendant, described the order as an attempt to prevent and silence O’Doherty, who describes herself as an investigative journalist, from probing what she says are unexplained deaths of young people.

One post, the judge noted, said that Campbell was being used as part of an “anti-Gemma psyop” by the defendant’s enemies.

In her application, Campbell claims the injunction had been “ineffective” in halting the alleged intimidation of the plaintiff by O’Doherty, the judge said.

Nobody could be under any illusion that the intimidation of Campbell by the defendant has continued after the injunction was granted, the judge said.

He added that “journalism could not be used as an excuse for the sort of conduct that the defendant has appeared to engage in”.

“Journalism,” he said, “is a rigorous exercise of fact checking and giving both sides of the story.”

The court also noted that O’Doherty, who he said was apparently on a speaking tour, had not come to court either for today’s hearing or when the injunction was sought last June to defend her position.

He was further satisfied that she was aware of and had been properly served with the proceedings.

In the circumstances, the judge said he was satisfied to grant an order of attachment, which requires O’Doherty to come before the court and answer claims that she is in contempt.

During the course of the hearing, the judge warned that any recording or filming of the proceedings could be a contempt of court, and anyone who sought to disrupt the proceedings would be asked to leave.

The judge made his remarks after David Kennedy SC said that a recording of a previous hearing of the application had been posted online, and after somebody in the public gallery shouted that the hearing was “a farce”.

Several persons holding copies of the Irish Light attended the court today.

In his submissions, Kennedy said that much of what had been said in the posts about his client was “particularly egregious.”

Counsel told the court that what was said was “clearly designed to intimidate and part of a campaign” against Edel Campbell. who has suffered emotional harm and distress as a result.

Counsel said that “freedom of speech is important,” but when one looked at the comments made by O’Doherty about his client, “there has to be a limitation on it”.

The court had previously heard that O’Doherty denies any wrongdoing.

Campbell sought the injunctions as part of her action against O’Doherty over the alleged unauthorised publication of the image of the plaintiff’s late son.

She claims O’Doherty has wrongly and unlawfully used the image of the plaintiff’s son in an article published on media controlled by O’Doherty linking unexplained deaths to the Covid-19 vaccination.

The injunction restrains O’Doherty from harassing the plaintiff or from publishing Edel Campbell’s and her late son’s images or any personal confidential material about them.

O’Doherty is also restrained from encouraging or inciting others to intimidate the plaintiff and was ordered to take down and remove any image of Campbell and her late son from any form of media that she owned or operated by the defendant.

That order is to remain in place pending the final outcome of Campbell’s action against O’Doherty, trading as ‘The Irish Light’.

The plaintiff claims O’Doherty is a journalist and the publisher of The Irish Light, a free periodical newspaper, and the publisher/editor of the www.irishlightpaper.com website.

Following Diego Gilsenan’s death in August 2021, it is claimed that O’Doherty used the image of the plaintiff’s son in an article which wrongly stated that he died as a result of the administration of the Covid-19 vaccination.

Campbell, from Kingscourt, Co Cavan, claims that O’Doherty has refused to stop using her son’s image and that the unauthorised and repeated use of her son’s image amounts to harassment and a breach of her constitutional rights

She claims the defendant’s actions have caused her emotional pain, suffering and harm.

O’Doherty rejects all of the allegations of wrongdoing made against her.