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,
Clairo at 3Olympia: Whispery vocals and piano licks make a seamless transition from bedroom to jazz club
‘I am at a loss as to how €5,200 goes missing’: PTSB customers say refunds disappeared without a trace
Explainer: What military aid was the US giving Ukraine?
Girls and sport: ‘You don’t really aspire to be something that you don’t see. There’s a lot more to be done’
WILLIAM QUILL,
Dublin 8.
