Tairgim:
Go gceadófar go dtabharfar isteach Bille Acht chun an Bunreacht a leasú.
I move:
That leave be granted to introduce a Bill entitled an Act to amend the Constitution.
Tá mé ag iarraidh cead an Bille um an Naoú Leasú is Tríocha ar an mBunreacht (Mionn Oifige Breithiúnach), 2025 a thabhairt isteach. I seek leave to introduce the Thirty-ninth Amendment of the Constitution (Judicial Oath of Office) Bill 2025. This is a short Bill and it addresses the judicial oath of office which is contained in Article 34.6.1° of the Constitution. Every judge appointed under the Constitution needs to take the oath of office and it currently reads in English:
In the presence of Almighty God I do solemnly and sincerely promise and declare that I will duly and faithfully and to the best of my knowledge and power execute the office [the person is undertaking] ... without fear or favour, affection or ill-will towards any man, and that I will uphold the Constitution and the laws [of Ireland].
It finishes with the words "May God direct and sustain me". Interestingly, the Irish version of the oath refers to "gan eagla gan claonadh, gan bá gan drochaigne chun duine ar bith". The Irish version does not refer to a man specifically but to a duine or person. One of the things this Bill seeks to do is to change the English version of the oath to say the prospective judge will act "without fear or favour, affection or ill-will towards any person", rather than towards any man.
The other thing the Bill seeks to do is to take the God element out of the oath. "I láthair Dia na nUilechumhacht" is the term used in the Irish oath. "In the presence of Almighty God" is the English, and there is a sentence at the end "May God direct and sustain me". I am a Christian. I believe and I do not have a problem with that, but that is definitely not true of every judge or every person who is appointed a judge under the Constitution. It seems absolutely contradictory in a modern state that we would require people of a different faith or no faith at all to stand up in the Supreme Court and make a declaration in the presence of Almighty God, a personage in whom they might not believe to any extent at all, to take the oath in the presence of that personage and then require that that same personage would direct and sustain them. This is inconsistent with modern Ireland. I am not anti-religion. It is hugely important. Many judges believe in God, but it must also be the case that many do not believe in God. As a result, it seems unfair to expect them to take an oath that essentially expresses a belief in God or else is a nonsense. It is one or the other. Therefore, this Bill seeks to amend that oath in those two respects.
We are very lucky to have a highly functioning Judiciary that applies the rule of law without fear or favour. It is often widely criticised, particularly online, for making decisions in accordance with law. However, we are lucky that we have a Judiciary that applies the Constitution and the rest of the law in an even-handed way, in sharp contrast even with other member states of the European Union. In the same breath, to require those people to take an oath which for some of them will be vacuous is grossly unfair.
The Thirty-ninth Amendment of the Constitution (Judicial Oath of Office) Bill seeks to amend the oath as set down in Article 34.6.1° of the Constitution and equally to correct the discrepancy between the leagan Gaeilge and the English version of the oath. This is something we have tried to do in referendums in the past in relation to Article 12.4.1° on the age to run for the Presidency, which in the Irish version is 35 and in the English version is technically 34, as it requires people to have reached their 35th year. It is not something the people went with, as it happens, but wherever we have the opportunity to do so, we should make an effort to standardise and remove discrepancies between the English version of the Constitution and the Irish version, which of course holds precedence as it is our first official language.
I am seeking leave to introduce this Bill to make two important changes to the judicial oath of office, including to regularise it in the context of offices that do not have a religious basis and should not require an element of faith of any person undertaking that office and to ensure those who are doing the important work our Judiciary does do so in the knowledge that they oath they have taken is a legitimate and fair one.
