Rejected, claims public misled on referendums
CLAIMS that the Government had misled the public on the legal implications of the referendums were rejected yesterday.
On Thursday night, hours before the polls opened, The Ditch website published legal advice from the Attorney General to Equality Minister Roderic O’Gorman.
It outlined the legal consequences of the changes to the Constitution on the family and care amendments in the referendum.
Senator Michael McDowell – a former attorney general and justice minister – who advocated for a No vote on both amendments, accused Government of misleading
‘The EU would hold more sway’
the public in the wake of the leaked advice.
Mr McDowell insisted that Mr O’Gorman’s comments to the Sunday Independent on February 25, where he said a Yes vote on the family amendment would not impact on areas such as tax law, inheritance and immigration were misleading.
Mr O’Gorman had said: ‘No, he’s wrong on that. Because the very clear legal advice we’ve received throughout from the Attorney General is that these items will not be impacted by what we’re proposing to amend in the Constitution.
‘The key reason is because the rights set out under all those areas are set out in primary legislation – and that doesn’t include a definition of “durable”, that doesn’t include “durable relationships” in terms of the families that benefit from those rights.’ Mr McDowell said the advice ‘underlines’ points he has been making about the impact of the family amendment. Mr McDowell pointed to a section of Attorney General Rossa Fanning’s advice that stated: ‘Policy makers will be required to offer greater weight to the rights of the non-marital family, including in child care, immigration and social welfare.
‘It is likely that issues relating to the application of Article 41 to non-marital families will be more heavily litigated than at present. For example, it is foreseeable that the provision will be relied upon in the context of immigration and surrogacy.’
However, Government sources insisted the AG later clarified that the change would have no impact on immigration law.
‘As referenced above, it is foreseeable that the amended Article 41.1.1 will be relied upon in the context of immigration. However, in my view, it is unlikely that it will have any particularly significant effect in this area,’ the updated advice states.
Constitutional law lecturer at the South East Technological University Dr Jennifer Kavanagh told the Irish Daily Mail that the Cabinet had correctly interpreted the advice and it would have no impact on immigration.
‘The Attorney General’s opinion is correct in the area of immigration law as EU would hold more sway on that matter,’ she said.
Meanwhile, President Michael D Higgins was among those to vote in the referendums yesterday, alongside his wife Sabina at their polling station at St Mary’s Hospital in Phoenix Park.
It is the first time Mr Higgins, 82, has been seen in public since he was discharged from hospital on Thursday, after experiencing a ‘mild transient weakness’.
Although turnout was expected to be low, it picked up throughout the day after a slow morning. In parts of Dublin, it reached above 45%, while polling centres in Cork City saw 50%, but it was significantly lower in Galway at around 20%.
The results of the referendums, which are decided by majority, are expected today. The family amendment will be counted and declared first.