Welcome to our Public Beta Site - What does this mean?
Dublin: 18 °C Wednesday 23 May, 2012

Government publishes wording of Abbeylara referendum

The proposed referendum is intended to overturn the Supreme Court's ruling in the Abbeylara case.
The proposed referendum is intended to overturn the Supreme Court's ruling in the Abbeylara case.
Image: Joe Dunne/Photocall Ireland

THE GOVERNMENT HAS today published the wording of its proposed referendum reversing the Abbeylara ruling and giving Oireachtas committees the power to hold inquiries.

The wording of the bill – officially the Thirtieth Amendment to the Constitution Bill, 2011 – was published this afternoon by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Brendan Howlin, who is responsible for governmental reform.

Howlin said the bill – which amends Article 15.10 of the Constitution – will allow the Oireachtas to have “an effective system of inquiry, which can secure effective and cost-efficient parliamentary scrutiny of issues of significant public importance”.

The bill is specifically intended to address the Supreme Court’s ruling in 2002 on the ‘Abbeylara case’, when it affirmed an earlier High Court ruling that Oireachtas inquiries did not have the power ‘to make findings of fact or expressions of opinion adverse to the good name or reputation of citizens’.

The Bill is set to be tabled in the Dáil on Thursday, and is due to have passed both the Dáil and Seanad by Thursday week, so that it can be put to a referendum alongside the Presidential election next month.

Irish referendum law requires that at least 30 days’ notice be given of a referendum – meaning the government has until September 27 to have the bill passed through both houses and put forward to a public ballot.

The government also today published a draft version of a new Houses of the Oireachtas (Powers of Inquiry) Bill, which generally outlines the terms under which Oireachtas committees will hold their inquiries if the referendum is passed.

The government has sought feedback from any interested parties on the content of the bill, and said it hopes to publish a full version of the legislation later this autumn.

Wording of proposed amendment to the Constitution

The existing Article 15.10 would be renumbered 15.10.1°.

Three new subsections would be inserted as follows:

2° Each House shall have the power to conduct an inquiry, or an inquiry with the other House, in a manner provided for by law, into any matter stated by the House or Houses concerned to be of general public importance.

3° In the course of any such inquiry the conduct of any person (whether or not a member of either House) may be investigated and the House or Houses concerned may make findings in respect of the conduct of that person concerning the matter to which the inquiry relates.

4° It shall be for the House or Houses concerned to determine the appropriate balance between the rights of persons and the public interest for the purposes of ensuring an effective inquiry into any matter to which subsection 2º applies.

Government confirms October 27 as polling date for by-election >

Retired judge to oversee referendum on judges’ pay >

Read Next:

Comments (6 Comments)

  • Randy savage 12/09/11 #
    Report this comment

    Il be voting no to this, imagine giving d govt more powers to judge citizens. It is for a court to decide fact not a bunch of elected tds. They are not experts on these matters and so have no place judging others.

    Reply
    • Eoin Sheehy 12/09/11 #
      Report this comment

      Oh for goodness sake it’s not some sort of gossip session they’re setting up, it has to be of PUBLIC IMPORTANCE, they’ll be doing what Tribunals have done for years only quicker and cheaper.

    • Jim Hunt 12/09/11 #
      Report this comment

      I have to agree with Randy, I’ll be voting NO to this too. I’m not comfortable with 4°, I don’t want some Jackie Healy-Rae type character having a say trying “…to determine the appropriate balance between the rights of persons and the public interest…”

      J.

  • Felicity Scott 12/09/11 #
    Report this comment

    A free and independent judicial system is the basis of democracy. Parliaments should only sit in judgement on their own – and in Ireland not even then!

    Reply
  • David Donnelly 13/09/11 #
    Report this comment

    If it does pass it has the potential to become very useful against individuals relating to gang and criminal activity. Yes I agree with the fact that the government and the judiciary should be separate but I do feel that the government should of course have the power of inquiry into matters that are of “significant public importance”.

    Reply
  • Garreth OMahony 13/09/11 #
    Report this comment

    I’m worried about part 4 as well. I don’t think that this legislation should be rushed. It’s very important in matters of the constitution that time should be taken. Rushing this referendum in could have far worse consequences. Would it not be better to go back to the drawing board and have this referendum when they have had time to think.

    Reply

Add New Comment