Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
RECENTLY, CONOR MCGREGOR launched a petition to see his name included on the ballot paper for the presidential election. It remains to be seen if he will be able to secure the required nominations by either 20 members of the Oireachtas or four city or county councils, as set out in Article 12.4.2 of the Constitution. However, many analysts indicate he’ll have an uphill struggle.
The purpose of this Article of the Constitution is to ensure that a person who runs for the highest office in the state has some support from established political actors. It is one of the many checks and balances built into our liberal Constitution. McGregor claims on the petition site that the process as set out in the Constitution ‘inadvertently restricts the direct voice of the electorate.’
It is not clear what McGregor desires from this petition. Is this the beginning of a campaign for a referendum on Article 12.4.2, or is it a call for a direct circumvention of the constitutional requirements, or is it simply another way to generate publicity?
In later social media posts, McGregor has insisted that he will be on the ballot for the November 2025 election. However, it would be nigh on impossible, even with full Government support, to have a referendum on Article 12.4.2 before the November election. At best, this is the beginning of a campaign for a future referendum.
The Constitution is one of the only parts of the Irish political system in which citizens have a formal role in the decision-making process. There is a deep irony in McGregor calling for a circumvention of the Constitution, due to its apparent restriction of the direct voice of the people.
It is also possible that this is just another step in McGregor’s plan to drum up support and paint a picture of himself as an underdog who is being gatekept from political power. This campaign positions the Constitution as something that needs to be ‘taken back’ by the people and entrusted to people like McGregor.
On one hand, the Constitution is seen by the far right as a symbol of establishment control over their political aims. On the other hand, they see the Constitution as the direct expression of the people’s will, which must be protected against the establishment.
This results in a phenomenon described by Simone Chambers as populist constitutionalism. In this view, the parts of the constitution which limit the power of elected representatives are seen as a limit on the power of the people, and therefore should be removed. For example, presidential term limits are seen as an unfair constraint on the people’s desire to vote for that candidate, and therefore a limit on democracy.
While in its rhetoric, the movement appears to promote more political power for citizens, in fact, it concentrates power in a small minority and eventually limits the power of citizens.
Erdoğan in Turkey is an exemplifier of this concept. In 2017, he used referendums to bring about constitutional reform, which concentrated power at the top and removed democratic safeguards — all in the name of restoring power to the people. Defending this reform, a spokesperson for Erdoğan stated: ‘Any attempt to form an institutional control over the people’s will is against democracy.’
Conor McGregor’s desire to get around the Constitution in the name of the people can be seen in a similar light. While his language appears sympathetic to democracy and citizen participation, in reality, he wants to remove checks and balances and dodge constitutional requirements that were enshrined by popular vote.
In a further post, McGregor stated: ‘As President, it will be my exact intention to uphold the Constitution and serve the people of Ireland in a manner that past presidents in recent years have failed to do so.’
Beyond the irony of McGregor’s stated desire to uphold the Constitution, this statement could reflect a potential desire to use the presidential powers more actively than previous presidents.
If McGregor’s goal were to expand the role of the President, then he is explicitly aiming for a concentration of political power in a singular entity. This is to be done in the name of the people for a more ‘inclusive’ democratic process. The contradiction is stark.
It remains to be seen whether McGregor’s campaign, either presidential or constitutional, will gain traction, perhaps not for this election, but in the future.
There may be legitimate claims, that limits on presidential nominations could be a way for established political elites to retain power and maintain the status quo. However, we should be suspicious when it is a different kind of elite, in this case, a controversial, multi-millionaire, who claims to be shut out by the doors of political power.
Reidín Doyle is a PHD student at Trinity College Dublin.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say