Doctors demand “urgent” medical intervention to save Julian Assange’s life 22:54 Nov 25 0 comments
Bolivia’s coup: Morales toppled not due to his failures, but due to his success 22:48 Nov 15 0 comments
Grayzone editor Max Blumenthal arrested in Washington DC 22:20 Oct 31 0 comments
London: Hundreds rally for Assange outside Belmarsh Prison 22:58 Oct 01 0 comments
World Socialist Web Site Report on: At least 290 killed in terrorist bomb attacks in Sri Lanka 23:00 Apr 22 0 commentsmore >>
A bird's eye view of the vineyard
Turkish Army Battle Tanks: Capabilities, Modernization, Prospects Thu Jan 23, 2020 19:13 | Scott
I will not let Hillary intimidate me or other patriotic Americans into silence Thu Jan 23, 2020 19:07 | The Saker
?The Eye of Moscow?: Russia?s new RDR equipment tracks NATO?s ?stealth? vehicles Thu Jan 23, 2020 18:57 | Scott
Offensive Operations In Southern Idlib Resumed Wed Jan 22, 2020 23:56 | Scott
The new Russian government: a much needed evolution but not a revolution Wed Jan 22, 2020 20:22 | The Saker
A Blog About Human Rights
Latest Updates Thu Nov 21, 2019 20:32 | Human Rights
US Holds China To Account For Human Rights Violations Sun Oct 13, 2019 19:12 | Human Rights
UN Human Rights Council Should Address Human Rights Crisis in Cambodia Sat Aug 31, 2019 13:41 | Human Rights
Fijian women still face Human Rights violations Mon Aug 26, 2019 18:49 | Human Rights
Saudi Human Rights Violation Fri Aug 09, 2019 20:41 | Human Rights
"A flaky website that purports to be ?leftist,? The Cedar Lounge Revolution, occasionally makes a relevant point or two."
That list of election priorities 11:25 Thu Jan 23, 2020 | WorldbyStorm
Pensions redux? 10:26 Thu Jan 23, 2020 | WorldbyStorm
As others see us? a continuing series 09:23 Thu Jan 23, 2020 | WorldbyStorm
Tommy Broughan not running again 14:19 Wed Jan 22, 2020 | irishelectionliterature
That new poll 11:50 Wed Jan 22, 2020 | WorldbyStorm
Life should be full of strangeness, like a rich painting
Some Thoughts on the Brexit Joint Report 11:50 Sat Dec 09, 2017
IRISH COMMONWEALTH: TRADE UNIONS AND CIVIL SOCIETY IN THE 21ST CENTURY 14:06 Sat Nov 18, 2017
Notes for a Book on Money and the Irish State - The Marshall Aid Program 15:10 Sat Apr 02, 2016
The Financial Crisis:What Have We Learnt? 19:58 Sat Aug 29, 2015
Money in 35,000 Words or Less 21:34 Sat Aug 22, 2015
Seanad Referendum - a camouflaged erosion of Constitutional rights?
The coming referendum on the abolishment of Seanad Éireann would, if passed, remove the existing constitutional right of the President to refer proposed Bills to the people for a referendum. It would pass the initial responsibility of passing Bills into law onto the Dáil alone - a dangerous development, particularly where any ruling party might hold an overall majority.A vote to abolish the Seanad would in fact pass most law making decisions that impact upon the people to the Dáil alone, passing such responsibility to a single parliamentary body, thus removing existing safeguards meant to protect against the introduction of unconstitutional or politically or otherwise motivationally biased law.
Abolition of the Seanad would mean that a single body, the Dáil, will be responsible for passing any new laws through parliament, which must then be signed into law by the President.
However, the existing constitutional right of the President to refer any Bill to the people for referendum will be removed from the Constitution.
With access to justice slowly being priced out of the reach of the ordinary citizen and making individual public legal challenges prohibitively expensive, this is a move that will result in the passing of extraordinary measures of unchecked power to the Dáil.
Although this aspect of the referendum is considered important enough to be detailed in the initial section of the Referendum Commission's public information booklet, it only appears on a secondary page of 'other changes' on the Referendum Commission's website and does not appear in the list of 'Main Changes'. One might wonder why, when this is a move that effectively removes the right of the people to decide on important changes in law that directly affects them.
Perhaps someone may care to comment or throw additional light on this.