Crotty v. An Taoiseach

Last updated

The question therefore is whether the State in attempting to ratify this Treaty is endeavouring to act free from the restraints of the Constitution.

Contents

Walsh J

Crotty v. An Taoiseach [1] was a landmark 1987 decision of the Irish Supreme Court which found that Ireland could not ratify the Single European Act unless the Irish Constitution was first changed to permit its ratification. The case, taken by Raymond Crotty formally against the Taoiseach (then Garret FitzGerald), directly led to the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland (which authorised the ratification of the Single Act) and established that significant changes to European Union treaties required an amendment to the Irish constitution before they could be ratified by Ireland. As a consequence, Ireland, uniquely in the EU, requires a plebiscite for every new, or substantive change to a, European Union Treaty.

The substantive issues in the case revolved around the interpretation of Part III of the Single European Act which codified cooperation on foreign policy matters between the governments of the then twelve member states of the European Economic Community – referred to as European Political Cooperation – into an international agreement. The majority of the Court ruled that if the state ratified Part III, it would amount to an unconstitutional delegation of the state's external sovereignty. The dissenting judges argued that the provisions only constituted a requirement to listen and consult.

Supreme Court decision

The Supreme Court decision was split into two parts. The first dealt with the constitutionality of the European Communities (Amendment) Act 1986 and consequently the first two parts of the Single European Act. The Constitution requires that the Supreme Court only hand down a single judgement in such circumstances.

The second part of the Court's decision considered Raymond Crotty's challenge to the proposed ratification of Part III of the Single European Act. As this did not involve a challenge to the constitutionality of legislation, each judge is free to hand down separate judgements. In a 3-2 decision a majority of the Court found Part III to be repugnant to the Constitution.

European Communities (Amendment) Act 1986

The judgement of the Court on the constitutionality of the 1986 Act was given of Finlay CJ. The Court first considered where the 1986 Act could take advantage of the Third Amendment which granted constitutional immunity to legal measures which were necessitated by membership of the European Communities.

It is clear and was not otherwise contended by the defendants that the ratification by the State of the SEA (which has not yet taken place) would not constitute an act 'necessitated by the obligations of membership of the Communities'. It accordingly follows that the second sentence in Article 29, s. 4, sub-s. 3 of the Constitution is not relevant to the issue as to whether the Act of 1986 is invalid having regard to the provisions of the Constitution. (para. 6)

The Court then continued:

It was contended on behalf of the plaintiff that any amendment of the Treaties establishing the Communities made after 1 January 1973, when Ireland joined those Communities would require a further amendment of the Constitution. It was contended on behalf of the defendants that the authorisation contained in the first sentence of Article 29, s. 4, sub-s. 3 was to join Communities which were established by Treaties as dynamic and developing entities and that it should be interpreted as authorising the State to participate in and agree to amendments of the Treaties which are within the original scope and objectives of the Treaties. It is the opinion of the Court that the first sentence in Article 29, s. 4, sub-s. 3 of the Constitution must be construed as an authorisation given to the State not only to join the Communities as they stood in 1973, but also to join in amendments of the Treaties so long as such amendments do not alter the essential scope or objectives of the Communities. To hold that the first sentence of Article 29, s. 4, sub-s. 3 does not authorise any form of amendment to the Treaties after 1973 without a further amendment of the Constitution would be too narrow a construction; to construe it as an open-ended authority to agree, without further amendment of the Constitution, to any amendment of the Treaties would be too broad. (para. 6)

The plaintiff made four arguments challenging the constitutionality of the 1986 Act. These were:

The Court rejected all of these arguments. They noted that the Treaty of Rome provided for moving from unanimous voting to qualified majority and concluded that:

The Community was thus a developing organism with diverse and changing methods for making decisions and an inbuilt and clearly expressed objective of expansion and progress, both in terms of the number of its Member States and in terms of the mechanics to be used in the achievement of its agreed objectives. (para. 13)

The Court ruled further that the "new" policy areas fell within the original objectives of the Treaty of Rome, that the creation of a new court would not increase the judicial power already delegated to the European institutions, and that the Plaintiff had failed to show how the new powers to be granted to the Council of Ministers could threaten constitutional rights.

Part III of the Single European Act

Walsh and Henchy JJ. gave separate judgements with which Hederman J. concurred. They ruled that were Ireland to ratify Part III it would amount to unconstitutional delegation of the state's external sovereignty. They rejected the argument that the constitutionality of a treaty could only be questioned when it was incorporated into law by a statute and ruled that the courts had the power to interfere in the government's exercise of foreign affairs in the case of there being a "clear disregard by the government of the powers and duties conferred on it by the Constitution."

The Court's dissenting members argued that the courts had no jurisdiction to question the constitutionality of a treaty which had not been incorporated into the law of the state. While they agreed with the majority that the courts could interfere with the government's exercise of the state's foreign affairs in the case of a clear disregard of the Constitution, they did not agree that the government had shown any such disregard.

Walsh J.

the Government is the sole organ of the State in the field of international relations. This power is conferred upon it by the Constitution which provides in Article 29, s. 4 that this power shall be exercised by or on the authority of the Government. In this area the Government must act as a collective authority and shall be collectively responsible to Dáil Éireann and ultimately to the people. In my view it would be quite incompatible with the freedom of action conferred on the Government by the Constitution for the Government to qualify that freedom or to inhibit it in any manner by formal agreement with other States as to qualify it. (para. 60)

Henchy J.

Without going further into Article 30, it is clear from those provisions that once the Member States ratify this Treaty each state's foreign policy will move from a national to a European or Community level. (para. 71)

Hederman J

It appears to me that the essential point at issue is whether the State can by any act on the part of its various organs of government enter into binding agreements with other states, or groups of states, to subordinate, or to submit, the exercise of the powers bestowed by the Constitution to the advice or interests of other states, as distinct from electing from time to time to pursue its own particular policies in union or in concert with other states in their pursuit of their own similar or even identical policies. (para. 105)

The State's organs cannot contract to exercise in a particular procedure their policy-making roles or in any way to fetter powers bestowed unfettered by the Constitution. They are the guardians of these powers, not the disposers of them. (para. 106)

Finlay CJ

The detailed terms of [Article 30 of the SEA] impose obligations to consult; to take full account of the position of other partners; to ensure that common principles and objectives are gradually developed and defined; as far as possible to refrain from impeding the formation of a consensus and the joint action which this could produce; to be ready to cooperate policies more closely on the political aspects of security. They do not impose any obligations to cede any national interest in the sphere of foreign policy. They do not give to other High Contracting Parties any right to override or veto the ultimate decision of the State on any issue of foreign policy. They impose an obligation to listen and consult and grant a right to be heard and to be consulted. (para. 22)

Griffin J

Having regard to the terms in which the provisions of Title III are expressed, I am in complete agreement with the Chief Justice in concluding that those provisions do not impose any obligations to cede any sovereignty or national interest in the field of foreign policy, nor do they in any way allow a decision of the State on any issue of foreign policy to be overridden or vetoed. The Treaty, being an international agreement to which the State is a party, has been laid before and been approved by Dáil Éireann in compliance with the provisions of Article 29, s. 5, sub-ss. 1 and 2 of the Constitution. The Government is therefore, in my opinion, as the organ of government by which the executive power of the State is to be exercised pursuant to Article 29, s. 4 of the Constitution, entitled to ratify the Treaty without the necessity of an amendment of the Constitution. (para. 89)

Further reading

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Treaty of Nice</span> EU treaty of 2001

The Treaty of Nice was signed by European leaders on 26 February 2001 and came into force on 1 February 2003.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Law of the Republic of Ireland</span> Constitutional, statute and common laws of Ireland

The law of Ireland consists of constitutional, statute, and common law. The highest law in the State is the Constitution of Ireland, from which all other law derives its authority. The Republic has a common-law legal system with a written constitution that provides for a parliamentary democracy based on the British parliamentary system, albeit with a popularly elected president, a separation of powers, a developed system of constitutional rights and judicial review of primary legislation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe</span> 2004 failed attempt to formally establish a constitution of the European Union

The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe was an unratified international treaty intended to create a consolidated constitution for the European Union (EU). It would have replaced the existing European Union treaties with a single text, given legal force to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and expanded qualified majority voting into policy areas which had previously been decided by unanimity among member states.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Single European Act</span> Revision to the Treaty of Rome

The Single European Act (SEA) was the first major revision of the 1957 Treaty of Rome. The Act set the European Community an objective of establishing a single market by 31 December 1992, and a forerunner of the European Union's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) it helped codify European Political Co-operation. The amending treaty was signed at Luxembourg City on 17 February 1986 and at The Hague on 28 February 1986. It came into effect on 1 July 1987, under the Delors Commission.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Ireland</span> Highest judicial authority in Ireland

The Supreme Court of Ireland is the highest judicial authority in Ireland. It is a court of final appeal and exercises, in conjunction with the Court of Appeal and the High Court, judicial review over Acts of the Oireachtas. The Supreme Court also has appellate jurisdiction to ensure compliance with the Constitution of Ireland by governmental bodies and private citizens. It sits in the Four Courts in Dublin.

The Third Amendment of the Constitution Act 1972 is an amendment to the Constitution of Ireland that permitted the State to join the European Communities, which would later become the European Union, and provided that European Community law would take precedence over the constitution. It was approved by referendum on 10 May 1972, and signed into law by the President of Ireland Éamon de Valera on 8 June of the same year.

The Tenth Amendment of the Constitution Act 1987 is an amendment to the Constitution of Ireland that permitted the state to ratify the Single European Act. It was approved by referendum on 26 May 1987 and signed into law on 22 June of the same year.

The Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution Act 1992 is an amendment to the Constitution of Ireland permitted the state to ratify the Treaty on European Union, commonly known as the Maastricht Treaty. It was approved by referendum on 18 June 1992 and signed into law on 16 July of the same year.

The Eighteenth Amendment of the Constitution Act 1998 is an amendment of the Constitution of Ireland which permitted the state to ratify the Treaty of Amsterdam. It was approved by referendum on 22 May 1998 and signed into law on the 3 June of the same year. The referendum was held on the same day as the referendum on Nineteenth Amendment, which related to approval of the Good Friday Agreement.

The Twenty-third Amendment of the Constitution Act 2001 of the Constitution of Ireland is an amendment that permitted the state to become a party to the International Criminal Court (ICC). It was approved by referendum on 7 June 2001 and signed into law on the 27 March 2002. The referendum was held on the same day as referendums on the prohibition of the death penalty, which was also approved, and on the ratification of the Nice Treaty, which was rejected.

The Twenty-sixth Amendment of the Constitution Act 2002 is an amendment of the Constitution of Ireland which permitted the state to ratify the Treaty of Nice. It was approved by referendum on 19 October 2002 and signed into law on 7 November of the same year. The amendment followed a previous failed attempt to approve the Nice Treaty which was rejected in the first Nice referendum held in 2001.

Amendments to the Constitution of Ireland are only possible by way of referendum. A proposal to amend the Constitution of Ireland must first be approved by both Houses of the Oireachtas (parliament), then submitted to a referendum, and finally signed into law by the President of Ireland. Since the constitution entered into force on 29 December 1937, there have been 32 amendments to the constitution.

An entrenched clause or entrenchment clause of a constitution is a provision that makes certain amendments either more difficult or impossible to pass. Overriding an entrenched clause may require a supermajority, a referendum, or the consent of the minority party. The term eternity clause is used in a similar manner in the constitutions of Brazil, the Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, India, Iran, Italy, Morocco, Norway, and Turkey, but specifically applies to an entrenched clause that can never be overridden. However, if a constitution provides for a mechanism of its own abolition or replacement, like the German Basic Law does in Article 146, this by necessity provides a "back door" for getting rid of the "eternity clause", too.

The European Communities Act 1972 is an act of the Irish parliament, the Oireachtas, that incorporates the treaties and law of the European Union into the domestic law of Ireland. The Act did not just incorporate the law of the European Communities which existed at the time of its enactment, but incorporates legislative acts of the Community enacted subsequently. The Act also provides that government ministers may adopt statutory instruments (SIs) to implement EU law, and that those SIs are to have effect as if they were acts of parliament.

The Twenty-fourth Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2001 was a proposed amendment to the Constitution of Ireland to allow the state to ratify the Treaty of Nice of the European Union. The proposal was rejected in a referendum held in June 2001, sometimes referred to as the first Nice referendum. The referendum was held on the same day as referendums on the prohibition of the death penalty and on the ratification of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, both of which were approved.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Primacy of European Union law</span> Legal principle

The primacy of European Union law is a legal principle establishing precedence of European Union law over conflicting national laws of EU member states.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland</span> To permit the state to ratify the Treaty of Lisbon

The Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Act 2009 is an amendment of the Constitution of Ireland which permitted the state to ratify the Treaty of Lisbon of the European Union. It was approved by referendum on 2 October 2009.

On 21 June 2002, the Irish Government made a National Declaration at the Seville European Council emphasising its commitment to the European Union's security and defence policy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon</span> Ratification of the current EU system

The ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon was officially completed by all member states of the European Union on 13 November 2009 when the Czech Republic deposited its instrument of ratification with the Italian government. The Lisbon Treaty came into force on the first day of the month following the deposition of the last instrument of ratification with the government of Italy, which was 1 December 2009.

<i>R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union</i> Constitutional decision of Supreme Court

R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union is a United Kingdom constitutional law case decided by the United Kingdom Supreme Court on 24 January 2017, which ruled that the British Government might not initiate withdrawal from the European Union by formal notification to the Council of the European Union as prescribed by Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union without an Act of Parliament giving the government Parliament's permission to do so. Two days later, the government responded by bringing to Parliament the European Union Act 2017 for first reading in the House of Commons on 26 January 2017. The case is informally referred to as "the Miller case" or "Miller I".

References

  1. [1987] IESC 4, [1987] IR 713, [1987] ILRM 400, [1987] 2 CMLR 666, (1987) 93 ILR 480.