A chara, – Colum Kenny writes (Letters, April 4th) that the judgment of the Supreme Court signals a need to replace “the complete outmoded text”.
That would be a mistake. If there were anything destined to lead to years of endless committees, it would be a review of each provision of the Constitution, anticipating both what might meet the approval of a majority and how it should be adapted to meet the needs of a coming generation. Any proposed text could face opposition from different directions, and would risk the fate of the proposed new Chilean constitution put to a vote in September 2022, and rejected by a vote of 62 per cent to 38 per cent.
Our Constitution adopted in 1937 has served the State well, subject to careful amendment in response to changes in political culture or to judicial interpretation. One exception was the Seventh Amendment at issue in this case, described by the Mr Justice Gerard Hogan last week as “the equivalent of the attempted cleaning of an old master by a careless restoration artist who then proceeded to leave an ink-stain on a Rembrandt”.
Such hapless drafting allowed successive governments to ignore its requirement for a reform of the Seanad franchise, a lack of clarity evident in a three-judge High Court finding for the Government’s interpretation. – Is mise,
Pancake Tuesday: The only recipe you need for making an easy, better batter
My elderly mother’s health is declining quickly. Should we prepare her home for sale?
‘Where I come from, people don’t do medicine. It’s not on your radar’: how a new generation of doctors is being trained
Pancake Tuesday: What’s the history, what does ‘shrove’ mean and what’s the significance for single people?
WILLIAM QUILL,
Dublin 8.
