The proposed amendment is intended to undo the effects of the X case. These are outlined by Carol Coulter, Legal Affairs Correspondent
In February 1992, in an in camera hearing in the High Court, the then Attorney General, Mr Harry Whelehan, was granted an interim injunction preventing a 14-year-old girl from obtaining an abortion in the UK.
The girl was already in the UK with her parents. But, on being informed of the injunction, they returned to Ireland to await a full hearing of the injunction.
The case arose out of a series of events which, when they became known, shocked the nation.
It emerged that the girl, who lived in south Dublin, had been sexually abused over a period by a man in his early 40s, the father of one of her friends.
She became pregnant as a result, was extremely distressed and wanted an abortion.
Her parents agreed, and brought her to Britain, but they also wanted to obtain DNA evidence for use later in a case against the rapist.
They contacted the Garda for technical advice, and the Garda contacted the Director of Public Prosecutions, who in turn contacted the Attorney General.
In the light of Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution, which protects the life of the unborn, the Attorney General felt he had no alternative but to seek the injunction.
The family was informed that they had to return home.
They did so, but the girl was at this stage extremely distressed and was seen by a clinical psychologist, who expressed serious concern at her emotional state.
She was placed under medical supervision.
The interim injunction was made permanent by Mr Justice Costello in the High Court, who said "there was a real and imminent danger to the life of the unborn".
The family decided to appeal this judgment to the Supreme Court.
In a three-day hearing, the Supreme Court heard that the girl was suicidal as a result of the rape, the pregnancy and her inability to obtain an abortion.
Evidence of her suicidal state was given by the psychologist who had examined her.
The court, by a three-two majority, allowed her appeal, thereby allowing the girl to travel for an abortion.
In their judgment, delivered later, the Chief Justice, Mr Justice Finlay, said: "If it is established, as a matter of probability, that there is a real and substantial risk to the life, as distinct to the health, of the mother, which can only be avoided by the termination of her pregnancy, such termination is permissible, having regard to the true meaning of Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution."
This was a statement on the legality in Ireland of abortion in certain circumstances where there was a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother, including the risk of suicide.
The Supreme Court did not comment on the right to travel. Nor did it say anything about the conditions in which such an abortion could take place, or any limits on it.
The Government attempted to row back on this judgment in a constitutional amendment proposed in November 1992.
This would have allowed a termination of pregnancy "where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother, not being the risk of self-destruction".
Opposed by both the anti-abortion and pro-choice sides of the debate, this was defeated, leaving the Supreme Court judgment in the X case to define the law on abortion in the State.
However, it is understood that no abortions took place under this judgment.
The Medical Council's ethical guidelines would have led to the striking off from the medical register of any doctor who performed one.
Two years after the case, the rapist pleaded guilty to unlawful carnal knowledge and sexual assault of the girl and was sentenced to 14 years' imprisonment. This was reduced to four years on appeal.
The man was freed in June 1997, after serving three years, and started work as a taxi-driver.
Two years later, his taxi licence was revoked after he was accused of sexually assaulting another 14-year-old girl.