asked the Minister for External Affairs if he will state the title under which the King attaches his signature to letters of credence of Ministers of Éire to foreign States; also, if he will state to whom are Ministers of foreign States to Éire now accredited.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Royal Title.
The titles under which letters of credence of the diplomatic representatives of Ireland to other States are signed are as follows:—
"George VI, by the Grace of God, of Great Britain, Ireland and the British Dominions beyond the Seas, King, Defender of the Faith, Emperor of India."
These titles are those which were in use when the Executive Authority (External Relations) Act, 1936, was enacted. The reference in these titles to Great Britain and the British Dominions, etc., has no constitutional significance so far as this country is concerned. The reference therein to Ireland must now be construed in the context only of those executive functions of the State in or in connection with the domain of external relations, for the purpose of the exercise of which the King is authorised by the law of Ireland to act if and when advised by the Irish Government so to do. All such letters of credence are countersigned by the Minister for External Affairs, and the countersignature of that Minister signifies that the accrediting of the diplomatic representative concerned is an executive act of the Irish State performed exclusively on the authority of the Irish Government, which is the constitutional organ of the executive power of Ireland.
The reply to the second part of the Deputy's question is as follows: Diplomatic representatives of other countries here are at present accredited to the State through the King, who is authorised in that behalf by the statute already referred to. Their letters of credence are addressed to the King; but they are now presented here to the head of the Government. This procedure is to indicate that the act of accrediting is, in each case, a transaction between our State and the foreign State controlled at all stages, so far as our State is concerned, by the Government.
Arising out of the Minister's reply, is it not a fact that, when a Minister goes from this country to a foreign State, he presents his letter of appointment and credence to the head of that State, and then, afterwards, to the Minister for External Affairs; and, if the same route is not observed coming back, is it not a fact that the Minister so appointed, coming to this State from any foreign State, has submitted the letter of credence to a person outside the State, and then afterwards to the head of the Government here?
I do not know what the procedure in other countries is, but the procedure here is that they are presented here first.
Does the Minister state that the head of the Government in this country is the proper person to have it submitted to as long as there is a head of the State available?
I would remind the Deputy that that whole question was discussed here at the time of the debate on the Constitution. It was raised, I think, by Deputy Lavery, and discussed then. The position is as I have stated in the reply, and the reasons, further, are indicated in the reply.