The Ombudsman for Children, Emily Logan (pictured), has called on the Government to hold the proposed childrens’ rights referendum as soon as possible.

In a submission to the UN Human Rights’ Council, to which Ireland will report in October, she said that the Government “should proceed at the earliest opportunity to hold a constitutional referendum on children’s rights”.

And Ms Logan said that the wording must contain a reference to “the best interests of the child”.

The new Minister for Children, Frances Fitzgerald, said she will study two proposed referendum wordings, one proposed by an Oireachtas committee last year, and one produced by the outgoing Government in January.

Ms Fitzgerald told RTE’s Morning Ireland that she would “examine the differences” between the wordings.

The wording produced by the Oireachtas Committee, chaired by former Fianna Fáil TD Mary O’Rourke, did include a reference to a child’s best interests, and proposed replacing the current reference to the inalienable rights of the family.

A number of experts have warned that this term could be used in such a way as to make intervention by the State in family life too easy.

It is also understood that both the Department of Justice and the Department of Health worried that Committee’s wording would expose the State to large liabilities before the courts.

The newest version of the amendment, agreed between the AG’s office and the office of the Minister for State for Children shortly before the election, was criticised by children’s charities such as Barnardos.

Ms Logan said yesterday she was worried the new Government might move to dilute the wording of a proposed amendment in a manner that would not have the best interests of the child at heart.

She said there was a danger that wording agreed by an Oireachtas committee could be watered down in an attempt to get a Yes vote in a referendum.

“It is important we keep the best interests of the child in any amendment,” said Ms Logan.

However, a range of legal and social commentators have warned that the wording proposed by the Oireachtas committee last year has a number of possible pitfalls.

Constitutional expert and recently appointed High Court judge Gerard Hogan said that the phrase “best interests of the child” could be ambiguous.

Everyone, he said, was in favour of the best interests of the child, but, he asked, “who is going to decide what is in the best of the child, and how is this going to be done?”

He told RTE last year: “We’re all in favour of the best interests of the child, and there is something of a mother and apple pie dimension to this. But in practical terms you have to ask yourself, when you’re talking about the best interests of the child, who is going to decide what is in the best of the child, and how is this going to be done? And if you’re talking about the State vindicating the rights of the child, you have to remember that this is likely to be officialdom, or some judge making this decision.

Another Trinity lecturer, Dr Oran Doyle, expressed misgivings about the wording. In a speech last year, Dr Doyle said that the proposed referendum posed the question as to who would decide what the best interests of the child were and suggested that Article 42.2.3 of the wording gave a de facto answer to this question, an answer which said might entail “greatly expanded state power and greatly reduced parental autonomy”.