Can we override the Supreme Court in a referendum?

[Libero]

I know, I know, it sounds daft, but hear me out. Could we insert a new article into the constitution which would allow the Oireachtas to overrule the SC?

If not, why not?

My Lord, it is Shepherd, there is nothing you shall want
Fresh and green are the pastures where he makes you redundant:
near restful waters he leads you to revive your drooping spirits.
He inteprets the right path.
He is true to his name.
If you should walk in the valley of darkness no evil would you fear;
he is there with his crook and his staff;
because sure the Oireachtas is now supreme, nah-nah-nah-nah-nah.

[smiffy]

My point exactly. Legal trickery was used to subvert their wishes. Who was arguing at the time that it would legalise abortion?

Michael Noonan explicitly suggested that this might be the case.

[stringjack]

Not that I'm in favour of the idea, but I don't think people have given due consideration to the supermajority requirement that Shepherd suggested. Regardless, however, the proposal would give the Oireachtas de facto power to amend the Constitution, without consulting the people directly.

Actually, Pidge, I'd have to disagree with you. It really depends on how you interpret the last 'that' in that extract (as in, 'that right').

I don't think that matters; first, I think it's far more natural to read the sentence as meaning that the 'that' to which you refer itself refers to the right to life of the unborn - I've never heard anyone argue otherwise. The argument in favour of abortion rests on the requirement to pay "due regard" to the "equal right" of the mother. In turn, due regard of an equal right suggests that if the right to life of the unborn requires that the state "guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right", the state must also guarantee in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate the right to life of the mother.

[Shepherd]

I'm not actually advocating the idea, for the good reasons raised by many here. But I was merely curious as to whether anyone, perhaps with a legal background, could tell me as to whether it was legally possible.

Don't forget that the people are indeed sovereign, and if they did decide to cede power to the Oireachtas to amend the constitution, that would be a completely democratic (and admittedly, highly dangerous) act.

[qtman]

I'm not actually advocating the idea, for the good reasons raised by many here. But I was merely curious as to whether anyone, perhaps with a legal background, could tell me as to whether it was legally possible.

Don't forget that the people are indeed sovereign, and if they did decide to cede power to the Oireachtas to amend the constitution, that would be a completely democratic (and admittedly, highly dangerous) act.

These nearly happened re. the EU Constitution.

Apparently, the Government, with the support of FG, had drafted an amending text that would have allowed the Oireachtas to transfer soveriegnty in the Passerelle areas without a further referendum.

[Libero]

Not that I'm in favour of the idea, but I don't think people have given due consideration to the supermajority requirement that Shepherd suggested. Regardless, however, the proposal would give the Oireachtas de facto power to amend the Constitution, without consulting the people directly.

Fair point. Perhaps many of us forget how our nearest neighbours muddle through without much by way of a written Constitution and Supreme Court.

But I was merely curious as to whether anyone, perhaps with a legal background, could tell me as to whether it was legally possible.

My understanding is that the people can amend the Constitution to whatever they like (leaving aside international obligations for the moment). This contrasts with countries like Germany where certain constitutional provisions are stated to be inherently unamendable. Also, the old 1922 Free State Constitution had certain core features protected from the usual mechanism of amendment.

[zakalwe]

surely the law and the legislature are subservient to the results of a referendum. do not referenda not have higher status than the others as the referenda represents the will of the people in the truest form for a particular issue rather than a political party that happens to be in power?

i would argue that the SC is subject to a refendum and not vice versa.

[Conor]

This contrasts with countries like Germany where certain constitutional provisions are stated to be inherently unamendable. Also, the old 1922 Free State Constitution had certain core features protected from the usual mechanism of amendment.

You mean.... inalienable and non-judicable?