Sir, – Dr Liam Weeks's article was timely, in particular his reminder that basic human rights cannot be decided by majority opinion ("Rule by referendum is not the best way to make decisions", Opinion & Analysis, June 2nd). Complex issues cannot be reduced to simplistic, feel-good phrases open to manipulation. The promised legislation on same-sex marriage will be crucial. The electorate should have been provided with this information.
It is hardly surprising that referendums and plebiscites were known as the tool of dictators. – Yours, etc,
CA WARE,
Midleton, Co Cork.
Sir, – Liam Weeks asks why it was necessary to hold the recent referendum to legalise same sex marriage. He takes issue with the idea that the majority should have to consent to what is a fundamental right for the minority.
The simple answer is that our Constitution required it. Since the decision of the High Court in Gilligan and Zappone v Revenue Commissioners, the meaning of marriage in our Constitution was interpreted to mean opposite-sex marriage. Any attempt to legislate without a constitutional amendment could have resulted in a swift finding of unconstitutionality in the inevitable challenge by an interest group. This sets us apart from most countries where constitutions can be amended by simple act of parliament.
Dr Weeks also notes the danger of the unforeseen in dealing with these issues at a constitutional level, citing the example of the Eighth Amendment on the right to life of the unborn as an example. The difference between then and now is that at the time of the Eighth Amendment there was a significant body of expert and academic opinion which predicted the exact scenario that was played out in the X Case due to the dreadful drafting of the amendment. In contrast, with the marriage equality amendment, there is near universal acceptance that the concerns raised by the No campaign were unfounded. – Yours, etc,
COLM KELLY,
London.
Sir, – I refer to the provocative opinion piece by Liam Weeks on referendums. Surely in this era of web communication we should be aiming at radically revising the traditional cumbersome governance model where our elected representatives relegate their personal mandates in homage to the whip imposed by an elite. We have a very patchy record since the foundation of the State of self-serving politicians generating considerable public cynicism. Why not have an annual referendum season where multiple significant public issue matters are debated and decided by the masses ?
Notwithstanding the debacle of the e-voting machines and concerns about verification and authentication, we should work towards streamlining the voting system and look forward to regularly giving new life to the democratic process by direct participation in national decision-making by inaugurating key legislation after securing approval of a majority of the electorate. – Yours, etc,
DES O’HALLORAN,
Tralee, Co Kerry.