Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 21 Feb 1940

Vol. 78 No. 12

Offences Against the State (Amendment) Bill, 1940—Messages from the President.

Do fuaras na Teachtaireachtaí seo leanas ón Uachtarán:—

Do Chathaoirleach Dháil Eireann:

Deinim-se, Dubhghlas De h-Ide, Uachtarán na h-Eireann, do chur in iúl duit leis seo gur chuireas, taréis comhairle do ghlacadh leis an gComhairle Stáit, an Bille dar teideal Bille um Chiontaí i n-Aghaidh an Stáit (Leasú), 1940, fá bhreith na Cúirte Uachtaraighe fá Airteagail 26 de'n Bhunreacht, féachaint an bhfuil an Bille sin i n-aghaidh an Bhunreachta nó i n-aghaidh aon fhoráilte dhe.

Ar n-a thabhairt fém' láimh agus fém' Shéala an 8adh lá so d'Eanar, 1940.

I, Douglas Hyde, President of Ireland, do hereby inform you that after consultation with the Council of State, I have this day referred the Bill entitled Offences Against the State (Amendment) Bill, 1940, to the Supreme Court, pursuant to Article 26 of the Constitution, for a decision on the question as to whether the said Bill is repugnant to the Constitution or to any provision thereof.

Given under my hand and Seal this 8th day of January, 1940.

DUBHGLAS DE H-IDE,

Uachtarán na h-Éireann.

President of Ireland.

Do Chathaoirleach Dháil Eireann:

Deinim-se Dubhghlas De h-Ide, Uachtarán na h-Eireann, do chur in iúl duit leis seo gurbé breith na Cúirte Uachtaraighe nach bhfuil an Bille dár teideal Bille um Chiontaí I n-Aghaidh an Stáit (Leasú), 1940, i n-aghaidh an Bhunreachta nó i n-aghaidh aon fhoráilte dhe.

Dá bhrigh sin, táim taréis mo lámh do chur leis an mBille sin indiu.

Ar n-a thabhairt fám' láimh agus fám' Shéala an 9adh lá so de Feabhra, 1940.

I, Douglas Hyde, President of Ireland, do hereby inform you that the Supreme Court has decided that the Bill entitled Offences Against the State (Amendment) Bill, 1940, is not repugnant to the Constitution or to any provision thereof.

I have accordingly this day signed the said Bill.

Given under my hand and Seal this 9th day of February, 1940.

DUBHGLAS DE H-IDE,

Uachtarán na h-Éireann.

President of Ireland.

Arising out of the President's message, I should like the Taoiseach to inform the House if the Government proposes to take any measures in connection with this matter as a result of the situation that has arisen of three High Court judges holding that this Bill was in consonance with the Constitution, and of three High Court judges holding that it was not. We are now in this very awkward position: three members of the High Court having declared the Bill unconstitutional, and three members of the High Court having declared it constitutional. Does the Taoiseach consider that a satisfactory position?

The messages (from the Uachtarán) announcing the decision of the Supreme Court and the signature of a Bill contain no matter for discussion, and may not be discussed.

There is no precedent as far as I am aware. I do not know, but perhaps the Taoiseach might like to take this occasion to inform the House.

I would like, if permitted, to say that the Deputy seems to have information which I have not got. The Constitution lays it down definitely that a decision of the Supreme Court is a simple decision, and there is no question, as far as I know, of a majority or a minority being referred to in it.

But, as a matter of fact, did not Mr. Justice Gavan Duffy, Mr. Justice Geoghegan and Mr. Justice Murnaghan hold that it was unconstitutional, and the Chief Justice, the President of the High Court and Mr. Justice O'Byrne hold that it was?

I do not know where the Deputy got the information.

I understood it was public property. Was it not stated that it was a majority decision of the Supreme Court?

A majority decision might be any number other than three. Is that not so?

I understood it was three.

In any case, the Constitution lays it down definitely how a final decision in this matter is to be arrived at.

I thought that you might like to inform the House as to what steps the Government proposes to take.

As I have said, the Deputy seems to have more information on the matter than I have.

That would not be the first time.

And it will not be the last time either, I suppose.

Top
Share