The political parties supporting the referendum on cabinet confidentiality have been strongly criticised by the Green Party, which advocates a No vote.
Mr John Gormley, the party's TD for Dublin South East, said the only compelling reason that the Government could offer to the electorate for supporting the referendum was that it was needed to facilitate the upcoming Moriarty and planning tribunals.
"This attempt to railroad the electorate into voting for a flawed amendment is tantamount to blackmail," he told a press conference in Dublin yesterday. "There is nothing to prevent the tribunals from starting their work. Any investigations relating to cabinet discussions can be deferred until after a more carefully thought-out amendment wording has been approved by the public."
The Dublin MEP, Ms Patricia McKenna, the party's justice spokeswoman, said the proposed amendment would restrict the availability of information which had been available in the past. "At present, Ministers have an absolute right to explain to the Dail why they resigned from cabinet. This right would no longer apply if the resignation related to cabinet discussions," she added. "Similarly, if a coalition partner walked out of government over a cabinet discussion, as the Labour Party did in 1994, it could find itself unable to explain to the electorate the exact reason why it had resigned and the arguments it had made in cabinet."
Ms McKenna said that if ministers became aware through a cabinet discussion that a fellow minister intended to commit an offence, such as illegally tap journalists' telephones or import arms, they would not be able to pass the information on to any other person, including the Garda.
"In his High Court judgment, Mr Justice O'Hanlon said the principal reason why there should not be an absolute cabinet confidentiality rule was that it would protect a corrupt government, if one ever came to power," said Ms McKenna. "This amendment, if passed, could protect just such a corrupt government."
She added it would also mean that government documents could not be released under the 30-year rule. "In fact, as this amendment contains no mention of a time limit, documents which are already in the public domain may have to be withdrawn," she said. "This would be in contravention of the European declaration of human rights."
Ms McKenna said the Green Party believed the restrictions were serious enough for the electorate to vote against the amendment. While the other political parties were suggesting that in reality the restrictions would not apply, the amendment's wording was clear that the confidentiality of cabinet discussions "shall be respected in all circumstances", except for the two narrow grounds explicitly detailed, she added.
