Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
ONE POLITICAL PARTY is calling for a no vote in the referendum on establishing a Court of Appeal.
Direct Democracy Ireland founder, Raymond Whitehead told TheJournal.ie that he will be voting against it, arguing that if this referendum is passed, people won’t have any recourse to the Supreme Court in most cases.
“This is a farce,” said Whitehead.
Democracy deficit
When asked if there was enough debate about the establishment of a Court of Appeal he said the Seanad debate was taking up most of debate time, stating: “It is diversionary. We have a democracy deficit in this country. This will be the final nail in the coffin of this country in terms of democracy and the right to justice.”
He added: “The government want to speed up the justice system, as there are delays in having appeals heard by the Supreme Court. But it will only speed it up in the interests of government and corporate interests. Sometimes democracy can be slow, but shouldn’t we be looking before we leap. Haven’t we learned from the past. Why are we rushing justice. Look where it got us before, rushing in at 3am in the morning with the bank bailout.”
How will it work?
He said he didn’t believe the government had given an adequate outline as how the Court of Appeal would clear the backlog of appeal cases that the Supreme Court is experiencing, adding that the government have not specified what their “plan b” is if it doesn’t get passed.
“What is their plan then, they haven’t told us, so how can they expect us to vote on something when we don’t know the consequences of voting for or against it,” he said.
In their flyer, Direct Democracy state that the long delays in having an appeal to the Supreme Court can be beneficial to mortgage holders in distress as it can delay the repossession process for banks in repossessing homes.
Whitehead said he believed the establishment of a Court of Appeal would have unintended consequences and urged people to get informed.
If you would like more information about the upcoming referendum on October 4, please visit the Referendum 2013 website here.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Asked this before and neither got an answer. Would we not be better off appointing more supreme court judges and extending the length of time they sit rather then creating another layer of courts?
Kerry, sure that would too simple a solution.
Constant Markievicz didn’t give his life in Stephen’s Green for us to be voting for a Court of Appeal…
Kerry,
From my reading, the thinking behind the move is that the Supreme Court will only deal with constitutional cases (as in other jurisdictions), while the new court will deal solely with appeals. Two new Supreme Court judges were nominated recently, bringing the total up to 10. I’d imagine it would be difficult to function if the court comprised even more members.
http://www.thejournal.ie/mary-laffoy-elizabeth-dunne-nominated-for-supreme-court-1008225-Jul2013/
Extending sitting time probably is an option, although where this has been suggested in the part I have seen people suggesting that even though they are not sitting, judges are still working as they need to explore all aspects and arguments sufficiently before coming to an opinion.
Thanks Ryan, my understanding from the Referendum Commissions document is that the Supreme Court can still accept appeals from the proposed new court based on public importance & interests of justice. Of course those appealing will need a lot of money to appeal.
Eh ? … Constance Markievicz was a woman… and died of tuberculosis.
I’m pretty sure I’ve seen you make this exact same comment (with the same errors) a few months back on some other article. Whats the plan here Seamus ?
Look again at that clip. Just to the left of the spouting idiot? Ben Gilroy, ‘leader’ of Direct Democracy Ireland.
Ever wonder what its like to be Constantly Markievicz all the time
@ Seamus Constance Markievicz was a woman…
How did DDI come to this position? I thought members were supposed to be consulated before party took a position.
I know,sounds menthol to me
“Direct Democracy state that the long delays in having an appeal to the Supreme Court can be beneficial to mortgage holders in distress as it can delay the repossession process for banks in repossessing homes.”
Forget the decent ones for a minute, this sounds like a crooks charter.
But DDI’s members haven’t voted for this policy??? How can Direct Democracy have a view without a democratic mandate??? Maybe Direct Democracy is just a sham and a front for certain private interests????
Yes they did
I thought though that there was still right of access to the Supreme Court from the Appeal Court? I didn’t realise the new court would infringe on that. Or am I misreading?
Hi Barbara,
You can find out what the main changes will be here> http://referendum2013.ie/court-of-appeal-main-changes/
Hope this helps,
Christina
You’re not misreading, DDI just don’t know their proverbial asses from their elbows when it comes to the law. There will still be an appeal from the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court if there on a point of public importance or in the interests of justice. You still have exactly the same right of appeal from the High Court, only that the destination will be different. If you have a sufficiently profound constitutional point to get to the Supreme Court, which, given the cost of going there, might suit a lot of people.
Seeing as this is DDI, there’s probably some conspiracy theory or other they have going about oaths, turning of the seal, law of the sea …
No you can still go to the Supreme Court if they accept your appeal and you can afford to appeal.
Thanks. Much appreciated :)
DDI just want the current system of inordinate delays to continue – hardly a fully formed political manifesto. What they are advocating is abusing the system rather than fixing it – I’m not sure what that has to do with Direct Democracy – probably done more for the Freeman element in the movement.
And even the delay point they’re making is far from a given – if you can’t get a stay in the High Court or SC then the judgment will be executed, and the odds of getting one in straighforward debt collection proceedings are slim to none.
True
Nobody’s asked how many Judges will be appointed, and how much will this cost the taxpayer, I like to know what Im buying when Im spending my money, so I would like to know how much its costing to VOTE YES,
@ Pauly O’Grady.
What DDI is advocating is that rather than rushing in yet again and adopting a new set of laws that will kick people out of their homes quicker (remember (a) the government changed the law so that the backs can kick people out of their homes in two months rather than twelve and (b) the Troika this week have also re-told the government to seep up the process so that banks can get their properties) , that people will say “No” if only (to start with) because they government is not willing to explain why they are doing the banks and Troika’s bidding yet again with these courts – to process evictions faster!
…They are supposed to be working for the people – not against them and for banks and a foreign body abroad first!
O’ and stop with the Freeman crap. Back that rubbish up with evidence.
As we yet again can see DDI still has indeed fools that laughingly say Direct Democracy is Freemanism.
Again tell that to the Swiss people and its government. They just laugh at that utter stupidity. There’s not a freeman person and or ideology in sight or in their government system! That was mentioned to a Swiss ambassador in Ireland and all he could do was also laugh at such rubbish and at the liars that spouts such rubbish.
The fact is that…
* There is NO Freeman crap in the constitution of DDI
* There is NO Freeman crap in the rules of DDI
* There is NO Freeman crap in the mandate of DDI
* There is NO Freeman crap in any policies put forth by central office.
* There is NO Freeman crap coming from its founder – and he was never one himself or accused of being one.
You see, those that ACTUALLY take the time to check out what Freemanship is – see that Freeman ideology is the reducing of laws and creating a more divided society to local levels, along the lines of anarchy non connected systems.
* Direct Democracy in fact means INTRODUCING MORE legal systems based on already national established lines of national communication and departments, utilised also in order to give power to the people by single legal vote in a democratic system and by joint unit nature at local level and national level with communication between both.
* Direct Democracy actually means INCREASING the powers of the constitution and social laws so that they are strengthened by legal ability – NOT lessened by Freeman ideology.
Short version – Freeman ideology is the OPPOSITE to Direct Democracy – but you won’t see the idiotic trolls actually explain that bit to you!
We might have one person mentioning some Freeman stuff once in a while – but at the end of the day, thats ONE member with one single vote against over 4,000 others that are involved with DDI (remember – a democratic organisation who’s constitution, direction, rules, mandate, etc is taken from the people of Ireland themselves with each individual vote – and 99% of them are NOT freeman) who are not equally into the Freeman stuff – nor want to be.
So to the fools that spout “DDI is freemenism” – just take them for what they are, idiots or someone with an agenda which wishes to throw deliberate dirt on our org as its gaining popularity massively – already out stripping Sinn Fein and the Socialist parties in recruitment and support of agenda.
Finally remember – not ONE TD or elected representative is willing to spout such nonsense about DDI ever since the foundation of the org a number of years ago – for they know thats exactly what the trolls spouting Freeman rubbish, is …just pure rubbish and they don’t want to be associated with such stupidity being put about by idiots who have their own agenda.
Let the anon’ trolls continue with their own stupidity – they are what we rest of us see them really are as.
“DDI is freeman”
…What utter stupidity!
As regards the Court of Appeal, I would suggest for some, more careful reading.
Some sites are cleverly worded but they boil down to this…
The Court of Appeal will ONLY allow a case to proceed if they think that a case has merit on (a) exceptional circumstances and (b) if its exposed that they are wrong legally-wise. Are they REALLY going to admit that all or many of their cases they have decided upon, is further subsequently wrong?
(Would you?)
Quote:
“In general, the decision of the Court of Appeal will be final”
…so the many, many evictions that are being lined up already by banks, are going to be enacted quicker (this alone will exacerbate an already national housing crises).
Suggested reading: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/court-of-appeal-is-no-substitute-for-radical-reform-of-costly-system-1.1532235
By the way, as other countries people have sadly found out to their great loss, issues decided by the Court of Appeals have historically had less than ten percent of appeals transferred to the Supreme Court.
Thus, for the vast majority of appeals, the Court of Appeals decision is indeed final. Also the Court of Appeal may hear oral argument from each side, in which each side answers the judges’ questions. In the Court of Appeals, there are no juries or witnesses; the parties argue their cases before the judges.
Whats this all boils down to is more massive money is going to be earned by more appointed judges, legal firms, barristers, solicitors, not including expenses and pensions for a great deal of them.
Anyone that has prior dealing with Irish court cases and knows how costly case are already – just imagine how much its going to cost more to every people with a case seeking justice when they have to go though yet another layer of massively expensive litigation’s going back and forth! How many will cave under such an additional weight alone – and maybe thats what the banks and the government (just for example) wants!
…But they won’t tell you any or all of the above – have they?
Raymond Whitehead™ is listed on Ben Gilroy™’s “trademark your name” site – which strongly bears the mark of woo: http://copyrightyourname.com/name/raymondwhitehead/
Complete nonsense, verging on a scam and smelling strongly of freemanism.
It’s a very strange position for them to take. Is it for media attention, I wonder, given that they’ll be the lone voice saying no? That poster is also very strange. Everyone else, from every other political party, seems to be arguing that people with mortgages in distress need to be helped as soon as possible. This goes completely against that by saying that delays of up to four years in our justice system are a good thing.
I just don’t get it. Justice delayed is justice denied.
I’ve said it before and I’m saying it again.
VOTE NO TO BOTH AMENDMENTS.
Changing the constitution to save money is farcical at best. 20 million is 5 euros per person per year. Meanwhile the Seanad is the only remaining obstacle to the TDs passing any law they want to. Don’t let them take that away for five euros.
As for the other amendment, why weren’t we told about it months ago? What tricks have they got up their sleeves? I don’t trust them one inch and I don’t care who supports them and who doesn’t.. I don’t know who DDI are and I don’t care. I’m voting with my conscience to keep what little democratic safeguards we have left.
They did announce the referendum months ago:
http://www.thejournal.ie/seanad-abolition-court-of-appeal-referenda-date-1007000-Jul2013/
Also you should read the Referendum Commission’s site for actual information about the Court of Appeal referendum. Voting no based on a lack of information when there is plenty available is foolish.
The Seanad cannot stop any bills goin through, they can only delay it and make suggestions of changes to the bill. With or without the Seanad, the Dail has all the power anyway. And on the topic of the new Court of Appeals, that has been on the cards for a long time, it’s not new info.
You mean don’t trust the goverment? Go against what they are telling us is right. Sure its not like they made us vote twice on things that we didn’t agree to is it,? But we must, they have been so trustworthy up until now….haven’t they.
“As for the other amendment, why weren’t we told about it months ago?”
It’s been in the Programme for Government since 2011..
james have the seanad ever rejected a bill and sent it back
I suppose someone has to oppose this one.
Just like the shinners on the EU.
Oppose for air-time.
Why havent some Army lads staged a coup yet?
If some APCs trundled into the Fail and arrested the whole shower of inept incompetent fools I imagine it would be welcomed with open arms by the public.
The corrupt and broken free state has to be rebooted
Nah! We’d all moan about being inconvienced because there was a coup d’etat going on and we couldnt get home in time to watch Corrie.
Which “army” Robert? Is there a particular balaclava wearing one you would like?
Because what would replace it would be far worse………….
Are these guys not just a front for the Christian Solidarity Party?
Pretty much. At the very least they’re two sides of the same coin.
Sure looks like it!
http://irishelectionliterature.wordpress.com/category/direct-democracy-ireland/
@ Daisy: Wow, interesting reading. Thanks for sharing that link.
Thought I read that online a few weeks back alright,so a million miles away from the Swiss model,thanks for the link Daisy,going to have a read now
Wow, if this is the kind of crap info people use to make sweeping judgements then perhaps people shouldn’t be allowed to decide referendums after all. How sad that people think so little
The people From DDI are NOT from the CSP.
O’ and http://irishelectionliterature.wordpress.com now has gone and done their own official checking.
Subsequently they have removed TOTALLY some items supposedly from DDi and have now addressed their site to show whom they are REALLY from – not DDI.
DDI are also demanding free Marks and Spencer cookies on a Tuesdays.
I demand them everyday!
So take that DDI!
At any other point in time DDI would be in favour of a properly designed court of civil appeal, but not now and not for the resons it is being done.
There are many civil cases that would benefit by a court of appeal, eg contract disputes, probate, personal injury, malpractice etc. We would normally support it for these reason but at this moment we cannot because for one, there is no legislation written so we do not know what we are voting for. Secondly and most importantly it is designed to benefit those who would financially ruin this country.
In the recent years we have seen much legislation from government designed specifically to favour the banks and the international asset stripping and transfer of wealth from the people of Ireland. This Appeal court referendum is being done now for the very same reason. The High Court listings are jammed with bailed out banks trying to take people’s homes. The blockage in the Supreme Court is holding up the process in the favour of the people. In the delay people are getting time to gather evidence of bank impropriety and learn from other cases. Thus it is becoming harder for banks to win. This referendum is designed to stop this in favour of the banks.
If we vote NO we will keep the pressure on the banks and government to force the banks to deal with debt write off. If we don’t they will simply repossess a hundred thousand home leaving 100,000 families bankrupt and homeless Hence we urge everyone to vote NO at this time and until such time as the banks are forced to act honourably.
I’m going to vote yes
Don’t complain to anyone when you don’t like the tyranny that follows
I’ve been reading through the info on the Ref website and am more confused now ; ( voting yes/no also impacts on how judgements are passed in the Supreme Court. Instead of one of the 5 voices delivering it each Judge can now voice an opinion.
At least if one voice represents all 5 it protects a judge’s impartiality in forming an opinion.
Also, will this part of the ref be a separate question on the ballot? If it’s just one question I.e. ‘do you agree with setting up Appeal Court’ ….well I’ll have to seriously rethink and do a hell of a lot of reading ahead of 4th October.
There will be a change in the way judges deliver a decision on a point of law which is considered to be of constitutional or public importance. There are two scenarios where this arises (i) where the President refers an entire Bill to the Supreme to validate it’s constitutionality before he/she signs it into law and (ii) where a particular section(s) of a statute are considered to be unconstitutional.
In the first scenario it has always been the case that the Supreme Court delivers one judgement or opinion regardless of who agrees or disagrees. This will not change if the Referendum passes. This is currently the situation in the second scenario also, however, if the Referendum is passed then it will allow judges to voice a dissenting opinion to that of the majority. A dissenting opinion can become very useful and important in its own right at some point in the future. You could have a case 20 years from now that will be able to draw on the opinion of that dissenting judge in order to prove its own point. The Constitution is meant to be a mutable object and capable of changing as the world around it and us changes. That is why it is kept general and the specifics are put in the legislation. In 20 years time when the views of society have moved on and someone is challenging a particular statutory provision, someone may be able to use that dissenting opinion to get justice in their case.
I hope this makes sense….I tend to ramble when I start talking about these topics! ;-)
I don’t think it will make a blind bit of difference to the ordinary man as it stands, if you do not have substantial resources ie money then you do not have access to the high and supreme courts. The court system is not about justice, more akin to Shakespeares “All the worlds a stage and all the players meerly actor’s”, it is the playground of Judges and legal teams and who can present the best performance on the day, it is winners and losers, it is anything but justice and fairness, it is unreal.
hoey bee you are right in our courts you do not get justice you get a decision.
Direct Democracy is a good idea in itself. It’s not a new idea either. Our 1922 constitution catered for it but it was removed from the final 1937 version – some would say illegally but it was perfectly legal. The first govt had 8 yrs to change anything without recourse to referendum and the extended that by 8 years, then made the change.
The problem with Direct Democracy Ireland is they have only left wing supporters. Which makes the party itself sound left wing.
The simple truth is the majority of people in any country work. So the majority are in favour of low tax low welfare.
Either you define left wing by reference to Mussolini (which is a distinct possibility given your posting history), you know nothing about Direct Democracy Ireland – who are clearly more UKIP-style right to far-right populist than anything else – or you don’t know the difference between left wing and right wing.
Also, don’t suppose you have a source for you ” majority are in favour of low tax low welfare” statement?
I think you’ll find that in many European countries especially the northern European ones the majority of people are not in favour of “low tax, low welfare”. In fact I would suggest that it’s the complete opposite.
I think you are all trapped in the fake left wing right wing labelling game. It is not real
Probably just doing this so they can get some people on radio or TV because the McKenna judgement (in the Supreme Court ironcially) means that coverage on the referenda has to be balanced 50/50. So if they are one of the few groups against it they are more likely to be involved in debates than if they were in favour of it.
But it does raise the question about DDI forming policies. If they are taking a stance on this then how was stance derived and who approved it?
have your say