Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 31 Oct 1933

Vol. 17 No. 23

Constitution (Amendment No. 22) Bill, 1933—Report Stage.

I had hoped to be able to have the Attorney-General here, but, according to the Standing Orders, it appears that it is not possible to arrange for him to be in the House. I move the following Government amendment:—

New section. Before Section 2 to insert a new section as follows:—

2. The amendments made by this Act in Article 66 of the Constitution shall, in relation to judgments and orders pronounced or made by the Supreme Court before the passing of this Act, apply and have effect in regard to the institution and prosecution, after the passing of this Act, of an appeal or a petition for leave to appeal from any such judgment or order and to the further proceeding, after the passing of this Act, with an appeal or a petition for leave to appeal from any such judgment or order which was instituted before such passing."

The amendment is to ensure that no attempts can be made to evade a decision of the Oireachtas in the abolition of appeal to the Privy Council. This Bill is intended to apply to all decisions of our courts, whenever given. It is quite clear that the Bill will prevent any appeal being brought to the Privy Council from any decision of our courts given after the Bill becomes law, but the Government is advised that there may be some doubt as to the effect of the Bill in regard to decisions of our courts given in the past, that is, before the Bill becomes law. The object of this amendment is to remove that possible doubt. Accordingly the new section which it is proposed to insert in the Bill declares specifically that the amendment of the Constitution made by the Bill will apply to past decisions and will, in regard to those decisions, prohibit the bringing or going on with an appeal or even applying for leave to appeal. The amendment will not make illegal anything already done, but it will make it illegal after the Bill becomes law to take any steps whatever in regard to an appeal.

I think there should be no doubt of the intention of the amendment. It is simply a mistake to base it on general terms to avoid the odium of retrospective legislation to particular cases. This is, in effect, retrospective legislation in general terms. It is on a par with the whole sad and unfortunate history connected with the question of Privy Council appeals. I know there is no good in making more than an individual protest but, I wish to say that I think the thing is thoroughly sad and discreditable.

Amendment put and declared carried.
Question—"That the Bill be received for final consideration"—put and declared carried.
Question—"That the Bill do now pass"—put and declared carried.
Top
Share