Comments on: Does this need to be in the Irish Constitution? http://stephenspillane.com/blog/index.php/2009/07/does-this-need-to-be-in-the-irish-constitution/ The blog of a Technophile and Political Junkie with too much time on his hands Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:00:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Stephen http://stephenspillane.com/blog/index.php/2009/07/does-this-need-to-be-in-the-irish-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-3086 Stephen Sun, 12 Jul 2009 13:14:51 +0000 http://stephenspillane.com/blog/?p=1698#comment-3086 ohh good point Finbar! Its cause of issues like that I am not 100% comfortable with the wording of the amendment. ohh good point Finbar! Its cause of issues like that I am not 100% comfortable with the wording of the amendment.

]]> By: Finbar10 http://stephenspillane.com/blog/index.php/2009/07/does-this-need-to-be-in-the-irish-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-3085 Finbar10 Sun, 12 Jul 2009 13:11:57 +0000 http://stephenspillane.com/blog/?p=1698#comment-3085 I've wondered if this rather vague commitment might have implications for the need for future referenda on EU treaties. Previous statements have given permission to become an EU member or ratify a treaty. This is the first positive statement of commitment to the EU in our constitution, a definite qualitative change. It's likely it won't have any future effects. But I've also a nagging feeling that it might. I’ve wondered if this rather vague commitment might have implications for the need for future referenda on EU treaties. Previous statements have given permission to become an EU member or ratify a treaty. This is the first positive statement of commitment to the EU in our constitution, a definite qualitative change. It’s likely it won’t have any future effects. But I’ve also a nagging feeling that it might.

]]> By: Stephen http://stephenspillane.com/blog/index.php/2009/07/does-this-need-to-be-in-the-irish-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-2894 Stephen Tue, 07 Jul 2009 11:21:13 +0000 http://stephenspillane.com/blog/?p=1698#comment-2894 Hmm, the militariasation arguement is a good point. I didn't think about that. Commitment could be construed as something different by the courst perhaps?? That is what I am afraid of. Hmm, the militariasation arguement is a good point. I didn’t think about that.

Commitment could be construed as something different by the courst perhaps?? That is what I am afraid of.

]]> By: Michael Walsh http://stephenspillane.com/blog/index.php/2009/07/does-this-need-to-be-in-the-irish-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-2878 Michael Walsh Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:20:46 +0000 http://stephenspillane.com/blog/?p=1698#comment-2878 I'm not really sure if these words say anything much more than they appear to say. Twenty years ago in <i><a href="http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IESC/1987/4.html" rel="nofollow">Crotty v. An Taoiseach</a></i>, the Supreme Court held that the Single European Act, as an amendment to the Treaty of Rome could not be considered as legislation "necessitated by the obligations of membership of the Communities" given that the State was not bound to ratify it. I can't see why a bland statement about Ireland's "commitment" to the EU changes anything. It shouldn't be forgotten that the Constitution has referred to the "obligations of membership" since 1972. Why would "commitment" be any different? Now that I think about it maybe the Government want to emphasise the peace promotion aspects of EU membership against the threatened militarisation many eurosceptics talk about — hence the new sub-section. I’m not really sure if these words say anything much more than they appear to say. Twenty years ago in Crotty v. An Taoiseach, the Supreme Court held that the Single European Act, as an amendment to the Treaty of Rome could not be considered as legislation “necessitated by the obligations of membership of the Communities” given that the State was not bound to ratify it. I can’t see why a bland statement about Ireland’s “commitment” to the EU changes anything. It shouldn’t be forgotten that the Constitution has referred to the “obligations of membership” since 1972. Why would “commitment” be any different?

Now that I think about it maybe the Government want to emphasise the peace promotion aspects of EU membership against the threatened militarisation many eurosceptics talk about — hence the new sub-section.

]]> By: Stephen http://stephenspillane.com/blog/index.php/2009/07/does-this-need-to-be-in-the-irish-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-2874 Stephen Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:51:00 +0000 http://stephenspillane.com/blog/?p=1698#comment-2874 Micheal, A fair point about the other statements in the Constitution, but none of them refer to an outside organisation which this does and as it mentions membership means that duties apply. Govt could use this to slip things through. I agree with you that it could say more. This amendment is shorter then the last one! Micheal, A fair point about the other statements in the Constitution, but none of them refer to an outside organisation which this does and as it mentions membership means that duties apply. Govt could use this to slip things through.

I agree with you that it could say more. This amendment is shorter then the last one!

]]> By: Michael Walsh http://stephenspillane.com/blog/index.php/2009/07/does-this-need-to-be-in-the-irish-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-2873 Michael Walsh Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:46:05 +0000 http://stephenspillane.com/blog/?p=1698#comment-2873 To a certain degree the Constitution is intended as a statement of values and as such contains quite a few, essentially non-justicable, statements like this. For example Article 2: "...Furthermore, the Irish nation cherishes its special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad who share its cultural identity and heritage." Article 28A.1: "The State recognises the role of local government in providing a forum for the democratic representation of local communities..." Article 29.1: "Ireland affirms its devotion to the ideal of peace and friendly co-operation amongst nations founded on international justice and morality." Article 44.1: "The State acknowledges that the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God. It shall hold His Name in reverence, and shall respect and honour religion." Given the importance of the European Union, I think it would be desirable <a href="http://purehearsay.blogspot.com/2009/06/those-guarantees.html" rel="nofollow">to say that bit more</a> about Ireland-EU relations in the Constitution. To a certain degree the Constitution is intended as a statement of values and as such contains quite a few, essentially non-justicable, statements like this. For example

Article 2:

“…Furthermore, the Irish nation cherishes its special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad who share its cultural identity and heritage.”

Article 28A.1:

“The State recognises the role of local government in providing a forum for the democratic representation of local communities…”

Article 29.1:

“Ireland affirms its devotion to the ideal of peace and friendly co-operation amongst nations founded on international justice and morality.”

Article 44.1:

“The State acknowledges that the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God. It shall hold His Name in reverence, and shall respect and honour religion.”

Given the importance of the European Union, I think it would be desirable to say that bit more about Ireland-EU relations in the Constitution.

]]> By: Stephen http://stephenspillane.com/blog/index.php/2009/07/does-this-need-to-be-in-the-irish-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-2871 Stephen Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:16:29 +0000 http://stephenspillane.com/blog/?p=1698#comment-2871 That the is the same wording as last time out Gerard. Last time out it was the propsed section 29.4.11. What i said then is same as now: <blockquote>This article gives constitutional backing to the Supremcy of EU law which has been laid down by the European Court of Justice in the case <a href="http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:61964J0006:EN:HTML" rel="nofollow">Flaminio Costa v. ENEL [1964]</a>. This is what we signed up to in 1973, so is no surprise that it is being given constitutional backing</blockquote> The full post is here: <a href="http://stephenspillane.com/blog/index.php/2008/04/so-what-will-we-be-voting-on-come-june/" rel="nofollow">So what will we be voting on come June?</a> That the is the same wording as last time out Gerard. Last time out it was the propsed section 29.4.11. What i said then is same as now:

This article gives constitutional backing to the Supremcy of EU law which has been laid down by the European Court of Justice in the case Flaminio Costa v. ENEL [1964]. This is what we signed up to in 1973, so is no surprise that it is being given constitutional backing

The full post is here: So what will we be voting on come June?

]]> By: Gerard Cunningham http://stephenspillane.com/blog/index.php/2009/07/does-this-need-to-be-in-the-irish-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-2870 Gerard Cunningham Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:11:58 +0000 http://stephenspillane.com/blog/?p=1698#comment-2870 "No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State, before, on or after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, that are necessitated by the obligations of membership of the European Union..." I'm not sure what exactly that means yet, but I can make one prediction. It will be spun by the No argument as saying that Lisbon is the last referendum, and will allow the Dáil to enact laws, do acts and adopt measures to give effect to future treaties without further reference to the will of the people. “No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State, before, on or after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, that are necessitated by the obligations of membership of the European Union…”

I’m not sure what exactly that means yet, but I can make one prediction. It will be spun by the No argument as saying that Lisbon is the last referendum, and will allow the Dáil to enact laws, do acts and adopt measures to give effect to future treaties without further reference to the will of the people.

]]>