A controversy has erupted over the decision of the council of the Law Society, the solicitors’ representative body, to publicly support a Yes vote in Friday’s referendums.
One solicitor, Gareth Noble, a leading family and child law solicitor, has withdrawn from the society’s committee on family and child law because of the position taken by the council.
Another solicitor, Jennifer O’Riada, contacted The Irish Times on Tuesday to express her unhappiness with the council’s stance, saying it was outside its remit and power.
Some other lawyers took to social media to complain the society’s 11,500 members were not consulted before the 39-member council issuing its statement.
Ireland needs its own Joe Rogan, someone to question liberal orthodoxies
Irish politics needs more tolerance for ‘conscientious objectors’, says Independent Senator
Broadcasting moratorium should be scrapped for future referendums, commission says
Referendums risked ‘legal uncertainty’ for migration rules, officials warned before O’Gorman’s reassurances
Asked about the complaints, the Law Society said in a statement on Tuesday it formally adopted a position in three other referendums “where the council has considered the issues and subsequently made a decision”. These were the Divorce Referendum in 2019, the Marriage Referendum in 2015, and the Children’s Referendum in 2012.
“The council considered the issues involved in the upcoming Family and Care Referendums and decided to a) formally adopt a position on both referendums and b) favour both referendums,” the statement said.
The council is “the representative and governing body” of the society. Elected by the members of the Law Society at national or regional level, the decisions of the council “are made in accordance with bylaws passed by the members through the Annual General Meeting of the Law Society”, it added.
It is understood the council decision was taken following a recommendation from the society’s family and child law committee. The 39 council members were then asked via email whether it should take a position on each referendum and, if so, what the position should be.
Just over half of the council members responded with the vast majority of respondents favouring the council taking a Yes position in both referendums, which involve two proposals.
The “family” amendment proposes to expand the constitutional protection of the family to not just include the family founded on marriage but also on “other durable relationships”. The care amendment proposes to delete Article 41.2, which provides the State shall “endeavour” to support woman’s work in the home, and replace it with a new Article 42B providing the State shall “strive” to support care provided by family members to one another.
Mr Noble said his concern is the council’s public advocacy of a Yes vote in both referendums was taken without any proper consultation with members of the Society.
He personally favours a Yes vote to the family amendment and a No vote to the care amendment, he said. His analysis of the care amendment is that it “does not offer a single enforceable right for carers, those who need care and for those who need to be empowered”.
“The position of the Law Society does not reflect that fact,” he said.
“In an era of misinformation, people look to the Law Society for information,” he said, adding he would have liked to see the society set out the arguments for and against the referendums rather than taking a public position on them.
Ms O’Riada, a solicitor in practice for more than 40 years, said she has “the highest of respect” for the society’s work but believed the council exceeded its powers in publicly advocating a particular stance in both referendums.
“The council may speak on matters generally but to speak on matters where the public has a vote and to promulgate a particular position is not within their power.”
Ms O’Riada said she personally disagreed with the council’s position on the referendums.
Referendums: What the amendments would really mean
“Every individual is entitled to take their own position and I have a problem with my professional body taking a stance and promoting it. The Law Society is made up of 11,5000 members who were not polled about this.”
Having raised her concerns with a member of the council, she was told it was too late to take any legal step, such as a High Court injunction, aimed at having the council withdraw its statement, she said. The cost of any such application would be prohibitive, she added.
Ms O’Riada said she decided to contact The Irish Times after hearing Taoiseach Leo Varadkar, when advocating for a Yes-Yes vote, refer to the Law Society’s position. “That was the last straw for me,” she said.
- Listen to our Inside Politics Podcast for the latest analysis and chat
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
