Petition to the President for a Referendum

national | eu | feature

Tuesday January 10, 2012 07:20

by PAW - People's Association Watchdog

Government is trying to avoid a referendum

In the past decade on two separate occasions the government had to call referendums on critical issues relating to the EU and our national sovereignty and in both instances the government wanted us to vote Yes and in each case the country vote No, first for the NICE treaty and then for the Lisbon treaty. Both the Irish government and the EU itself in their fundamentaly undemocratic way rejected both of these exercises in our democratic rights and waited a short while before launching full scale propaganda onslaughts and got us to vote a 2nd time and by using mis-information, fear mongering and lies, they remolded public opinion such that we voted the 'correct' way -YES the second time around.

Now the government probably quite rightly senses it may not be able to fool us three days and in a bid to submit fully to the financial oligarchy which now seem to have the final say over most nations these days, the government are doing all they can to avoid another referendum and if this means running roughshod over the Constitution so be it. But first it is important that people understand what they are doing and should object and the People's Association Watchdog has done a very good job of high-lightling exactly what they are doing and the many sections or articles of the Constitution that they intend to ignore.

EU & European Central Bank HQ

A Uachtaráin,

It is my assertion that the current government of the Irish Republic is attempting to initiate changes that will negatively impact the welfare of the people of Ireland.

An Taoiseach, Enda Kenny T.D. is seeking to circumvent the initiation of a referendum by seeking to have a ruling from the Attorney General which will deny the people of Ireland our constitutional right to self determination which is also a principle of international law.

I am hereby petitioning you with respect in your capacity as Uachtarán na hÉireann to invoke your powers under Article 27.5.1 to call a referendum on the ESM Treaty, a proposal I believe is of such national importance that the will of the people should be accordingly ascertained.

Article 15.4.1° The Oireachtas shall not enact any law which is in any respect repugnant to this Constitution or any provision thereof.

A trip down memory lane ... Lisbon Treaty: Three Strikes, You’re Out | The Lisbon Treaty and the triumph of technocracy | 13 things the Lisbon Treaty would do | Nice debate, shame about the treaty? | Nice and the corporate agenda: The changes to article 133 | Article 133 - The Elephant in the Living Room of the Nice II Debate | http://www.indymedia.ie/article133/ | Link 3

I believe that the proposed bill would be repugnant to Bunreacht na hÉireann with respect to:

Article 1 The Irish nation hereby affirms its inalienable, indefeasible, and sovereign right to choose its own form of Government, to determine its relations with other nations, and to develop its life, political, economic and cultural, in accordance with its own genius and traditions.

Article 5 Ireland is a sovereign, independent, democratic state.

Article 6
1. All powers of government, legislative, executive and judicial, derive, under God, from the people, whose right it is to designate the rulers of the State and, in final appeal, to decide all questions of national policy, according to the requirements of the common good.

2. These powers of government are exercisable only by or on the authority of the organs of State established by this Constitution.

Article 9 3. Fidelity to the nation and loyalty to the State are fundamental political duties of all citizens.

Article 10
1. All natural resources, including the air and all forms of potential energy, within the jurisdiction of the Parliament and Government established by this Constitution and all royalties and franchises within that jurisdiction belong to the State subject to all estates and interests therein for the time being lawfully vested in any person or body.

Article 11 All revenues of the State from whatever source arising shall, subject to such exception as may be provided by law, form one fund, and shall be appropriated for the purposes and in the manner and subject to the charges and liabilities determined and imposed by law

Precedence
We would ask you to consider: Crotty v. An Taoiseach 1987 which established that significant changes to European Union treaties required an amendment to the constitution before they could be ratified by the state. This would require a referendum.

The words of Mr. Justice Hederman in relation to the ratification of the Single European Act

The court held that it is not within the competence of the Government, or indeed of the Oireachtas, to free themselves from the restraints of the Constitution, or to transfer their powers to other bodies, unless expressly empowered so to do by the Constitution. They are both creatures of the Constitution and are not empowered to act free from the restraints of the Constitution.

(9 April 1987, Supreme Court 1986 No. 12036P): '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.

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.'

Mr Justice Walsh reminded us: Article 6 of the Constitution refers to the powers of government as being derived from the people, whose right it is to designate the rulers of the State “and, in final appeal, to decide all questions of national policy, according to the requirements of the common good.” It must follow therefore that all the powers of government are to be exercised according to the requirements of the common good… The essential nature of sovereignty is the right to say Yes or to say No.

I would like to draw your particular attention to certain articles of the Treaty Establishing the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) presented in Brussels on July 11th 2011 which clearly show a loss of sovereignty to the people of Ireland should it be ratified:

ARTICLE 3 The purpose of the ESM shall be to mobilise funding and provide financial assistance, under strict economic policy conditionality, to the benefit of ESM Members which are experiencing or are threatened by severe financing problems, if indispensable to safeguard the financial stability of the euro area as a whole. For this purpose, the ESM shall be entitled to raise funds by issuing financial instruments or by entering into financial or other agreements or arrangements with ESM Members, financial institutions or other third parties.

ARTICLE 4
2. The decisions of the Board of Governors and the Board of Directors shall be taken by mutual agreement, qualified majority or simple majority as specified in this Treaty. In respect of all decisions, a quorum of 2/3 of the members with voting rights representing at least 2/3 of the voting rights must be present.

4. The adoption of a decision by qualified majority requires 80 % of the votes cast.

5. The adoption of a decision by simple majority requires a majority of the votes cast.

6. The voting rights of each ESM Member, as exercised by its appointee or by the latter's representative on the Board of Governors or Board of Directors, shall be equal to the number of shares allocated to it in the authorised capital stock of the ESM as set out in Annex II.

7. If any ESM Member fails to pay any part of the amount due in respect of its obligations in relation to paid-in shares or calls of capital under Articles 8, 9 and 10, or in relation to the reimbursement of the financial assistance under Article 14 or 15, such ESM Member shall be unable, for so long as such failure continues, to exercise any of its voting rights. The voting thresholds shall be recalculated accordingly

ARTICLE 5
6. The Board of Governors shall take the following decisions by mutual agreement:
(a) to issue new shares on terms other than at par, in accordance with Article 8(2); T/ESM/en 12
(b) to make the capital calls, in accordance with Article 9(1);
(c) to change the authorised capital stock and adapt the maximum lending volume of the ESM, in accordance with Article 10(1);
(k) to make adaptations to this Treaty as a direct consequence of the accession of new members, including changes to be made to the distribution of capital among ESM Members and the calculation of such a distribution as a direct consequence of the accession of a new member to the ESM, in accordance with Article 39
(f) to establish other funds, in accordance with Article 20;
(g) on the actions to be taken for recovering a debt from an ESM Member, in accordance with Article 21(2) and (3)
(k) to waive the immunity of the Chairperson of the Board of Governors, a Governor, alternate Governor, Director, alternate Director or the Managing Director, in accordance with Article 30(2)
(n) any other necessary decision not explicitly provided for by this Treaty

ARTICLE 8 in its Entirety

ARTICLE 9 in its Entirety

ARTICLE 10 in its Entirety

ARTICLE 11 in its Entirety

ARTICLE 12 in its Entirety

ARTICLE 13 7. The European Commission – wherever possible together with the IMF, and in liaison with the ECB – shall be entrusted with monitoring the compliance with the economic policy conditionality attached to the financial assistance. On the basis of the report of the European Commission, the Board of Directors shall decide, by mutual agreement, on the disbursement of the tranches of the financial assistance subsequent to the first tranche.

ARTICLE 21 Coverage of losses
1. Losses arising in the ESM operations shall be charged: (a) firstly, against the reserve fund; (b) secondly, against the paid-in capital; and (c) lastly, against an appropriate amount of the authorised unpaid capital, which shall be called in accordance with Article 9(3)

2. If an ESM Member fails to meet the required payment under a capital call made pursuant to Article 9(2) or (3), a revised increased capital call shall be made to all ESM Members with a view to ensuring that the ESM receives the total amount of paid-in capital needed. The Board of Governors shall decide an appropriate course of action for ensuring that the ESM Member concerned settles its debt to the ESM within a reasonable period of time. The Board of Governors shall be entitled to require the payment of default interest on the overdue amount.

ARTICLE 22 The Board of Directors shall approve the ESM budget annually

ARTICLE 23 1. The Board of Governors shall approve the annual accounts of the ESM.

ARTICLE 27
1. To enable the ESM to fulfil its purpose, the legal status and the privileges and immunities set out in this Article shall be accorded to the ESM in the territory of each ESM Member. The ESM shall endeavour to obtain recognition of its legal status and of its privileges and immunities in other territories in which it performs functions or holds assets.

2. The ESM shall have full legal personality; it shall have full legal capacity to: (a) acquire and dispose of movable and immovable property; (b) contract; (c) be a party to legal proceedings; and (d) enter into a headquarter agreement and/or protocols as necessary for ensuring that its legal status and its privileges and immunities are recognised and enforced.

3. The ESM, its property, funding and assets, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall enjoy immunity from every form of judicial process except to the extent that the ESM expressly waives its immunity for the purpose of any proceedings or by the terms of any contract, including the documentation of the funding instruments.

4. The property, funding and assets of the ESM shall, wherever located and by whomsoever held, be immune from search, requisition, confiscation, expropriation or any other form of seizure, taking or foreclosure by executive, judicial, administrative or legislative action.

5. The archives of the ESM and all documents belonging to the ESM or held by it, shall be inviolable.

6. The premises of the ESM shall be inviolable.

7. The official communications of the ESM shall be accorded by each ESM Member and by each state which has recognised the legal status and the privileges and immunities of the ESM, the same treatment as it accords to the official communications of an ESM Member. 8. To the extent necessary to carry out the activities provided for in this Treaty, all property, funding and assets of the ESM shall be free from restrictions, regulations, controls and moratoria of any nature. 9. The ESM shall be exempted from any requirement to be authorised or licensed as a credit institution, investment services provider or other authorised licensed or regulated entity under the laws of each ESM Member.

ARTICLE 30 1. In the interest of the ESM, the Chairperson of the Board of Governors, Governors, alternate Governors, Directors, alternate Directors, as well as the Managing Director and other staff members shall be immune from legal proceedings with respect to acts performed by them in their official capacity and shall enjoy inviolability in respect of their official papers and documents.

6. Each ESM Member shall promptly take the action necessary for the purposes of giving effect to this Article in the terms of its own law and shall inform the ESM accordingly.

ARTICLE 31 2. The ESM Members shall, wherever possible, take the appropriate measures to remit or refund the amount of indirect taxes or sales taxes included in the price of movable or immovable property where the ESM makes, for its official use, substantial purchases, the price of which includes taxes of this kind.

6. No taxation of any kind shall be levied on any obligation or security issued by the ESM including any interest or dividend thereon by whomsoever held: (a) which discriminates against such obligation or security solely because of its origin; or (b) if the sole jurisdictional basis for such taxation is the place or currency in which it is issued, made payable or paid, or the location of any office or place of business maintained by the ESM.

ARTICLE 36
1. Without prejudice to paragraph 2, payment of paid-in shares of the amount initially subscribed by each ESM Member shall be made in five annual instalments of 20 % each of the total amount. The first instalment shall be paid by each ESM Member within fifteen days of the date of entry into force of this Treaty, but not earlier than 2 January 2013. The remaining four instalments shall each be payable on the first, second, third and fourth anniversary of the payment date of the first instalment.

2. During the five-year period of capital payment by instalments, ESM Members shall provide, in a timely manner prior to the issuance date, appropriate instruments in order to maintain a minimum 15 % ratio between paid-in capital and the outstanding amount of ESM issuances.

ARTICLE 37 Temporary correction of the contribution key
1. At inception, the ESM Members shall subscribe the authorised capital stock on the basis of the initial contribution key as specified in Annex I. The temporary correction included in this initial contribution key shall apply for a period of twelve years after the date of adoption of the euro by the ESM Member concerned.

A Uachtaráin, this Treaty Establishing the European Stability Mechanism is planned to be deposited with the General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union no later than 31 December 2012, once deposited it will come into force on the 1st day of February 2013.

It is beyond all doubt that such measures as mentioned above are of paramount importance to the people of Ireland and as such should be put to referendum with clear unbiased detailed information made widely available to every citizen in order to ensure informed consent is given or withheld in this matter.

Yours Sincerely

esm_final.doc 0.06 Mb

save preference

Comments (31 of 31)

Jump To Comment:

"It's The Constitution Stupid - NOT the economy"

by W. Finnerty

Wed Jan 11, 2012 07:26

This is the best piece of news I've seen in a long time.

I would like to wish this much needed People's Association Watchdog campaign -- in support of Bunreacht na hEireann, the HIGHEST law of the Republic of Ireland -- every success.

hypocrcracy continues

by old codger - pensioner

Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:58

In a recent interview given to Bloomberg tv Michael Noonan explained that the government had no fear of a referendum, as they had shown in the lisbon farce they could always have a second vote. He showed great merriment and chuckled . WE ARE BEING BETRAYED BY THE VERY PEOPLE THAT WE CHOSE TO PROTECT OUR PEOPLE. THEY ARE ALL INVETERATE LIARS .

Totalitarianism

Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:35

"Rape of the Mind" (as in "The Totalitarianism of the Global Banking Cartel and Supporting Legal Professions")

The above sub-heading was one of a number used in an e-mail sent yesterday to Chief Justice Susan Denham (Republic of Ireland), which was copied to some other senior lawyers, to some law firms, and to some senior politicians (among others).

Though many (if not all) of the banks around the world may be hopelessly bankrupt at the present time as far as "paper money" is concerned, largely as a result of their own private multi-trillion Euros "derivatives" gambling debts, there is no reason whatever (that I know of) to believe that any of the leading bankers (e.g. the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, and so on) are now bankrupt, or anything remotely like it.

Far from it, it seems to me that these leading bankers -- just a few dozen people, or even less perhaps -- are using their already vast and ever increasing property wealth, mineral/oil/gas reserves "ownership" (on paper) wealth, corporate ownership wealth, "senior politician and senior lawyer ownership" wealth, and so on, to continue implementing and strengthening, by all of the surreptitious means available to them, what can only be described (in my view) as a uniquely totalitarian form of world government, which now looks destined to regulate every realm of life -- for all (or almost all) of the world's six billon (or so) human inhabitants -- in a highly dictatorial and tyrannous manner, and which they, and they alone, will make all the important decisions about.

Unless that is, the legal professions of the world very soon "put their foot down" -- firmly, and in a no-nonsense manner-- regarding the outrageous abuses and violations of constitutional and human rights law now taking place all around the world.

Hence the overall contents of my e-mail dated January 11th 2011 (i.e. yesterday) to Chief Justice Susan Denham, which can be viewed in full at the following location:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/IrishLegalProfessions...l.htm

The 'legal profession', W..

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party

Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:11

For the most part do what it says on their tins. Just like the oldest profession of them all, they 'solicit' for Business.
And the wuncha bankers you mention are their main pimps.
The exceptions, and there are honourable ones, are just that, exceptional and egregious.

Any meaningful change will require a revolution in legal perspective, away from the neo-feudal private ownership of common human resources by corporatised 'personalities', defended by vested corporate lawyers; and back to a system labelled primitive because of the historic abuses of commonage. But it must be bigger than nationalisation, it must be global, and thats a tricky operation given the totalitarian implications, which can only be avoided by the old chestnut of eternal vigilance requisite to the preservation of liberty. Apache country.

"The exceptions, and there are honourable ones, are just that, exceptional and egregious."

Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:57

Re: Comment made by Opus at Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:11

I note what you say regarding these exceptions (concerning the overall membership of the legal profession).

However, I feel I should point out that -- to date -- and despite the numerous attempts of many different kinds that I (and others who have tried to help me) have made since 1998, and which I have long ago lost count of, I have not succeeded in locating a single lawyer of the type you describe: i.e. one who is willing to use legislation which is already in place, for the purpose of openly and honestly challenging systemic government crime of the kind that involves extremely serious violations of constitutional and human rights law.

Consequently, and if by any chance you might be willing to name one or two such lawyers (that you appear to know of), so that I could approach them for the purpose of trying to find the professional legal representation, and professional legal help, which I continue to desperately need, it would be very much appreciated.

sorry W

Thu Jan 12, 2012 13:21

My comment was in relation to low-level practitioners who do free-legal aid for the indigent and are conscientious in what they do. As with horses, they shoot Finucanes, dont they.

Patrick Finucane RIP (1949 – 1989)

Thu Jan 12, 2012 15:59

Re: Comment by Opus at Thu Jan 12, 2012 13:21

And it's not just human rights lawyers like Pat Finucane of Northern Ireland who get themselves assassinated because of their efforts to support genuine justice. ("Two public investigations concluded that elements of the British state apparatus colluded in Finucane's murder and there have been high-profile calls for a public inquiry.") From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Finucane_(solicitor)

Far more importantly (in my view), and having due regard for the fact that the Republic of the United States of America is still the most powerful nation on earth in many (if not almost all) respects, it's also the case that United States lawyers like former Republician President Abraham Lincoln, and former US Attorney General Robert Kennedy, both of whom vigorously supported genuine democracy, and genuine justice, as far as I know, have also been assassinated: while holding high public office.

The situation with former President Abraham Lincoln seems particularly interesting, and worrying (to me at least): in that it was he who provided humanity with the best and simplest definition of genuine democracy that I know of: i.e. "government of the people, by the people, for the people".

How very different President Lincoln's style of genuine democratic government was to the arrogant, dictatorial, tyrannical and totalitarian world "government of the unelected bankers, by the unelected bankers, for the unelected bankers" brand of "democracy" (so called) which we are now all saddled with, and unable -- try as we might it apparently -- to rid ourselves of: as things stand at the present time.

Anyway, many thanks for your reply. I feel I fully understand your situation regarding the "low-level practitioners" restriction you have pointed out.

Constitutionalism, or Totalitarianism (using City of London & Wall Street style "Monetarism"): which will it be?

Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:14

"The British Empire’s sole intention is to preserve the system of empire and they are more than willing to launch thermonuclear war in order to do so."

This is what some people in the United States of America are thinking at the present time.

As can be seen in the video report at the www address provided below (which is approximately 7.5 minutes in duration), such beliefs do appear to be substantiated by recent (and not so recent) public statements coming from senior political and military figures in Russia, and in China.

For those who might not be familiar with the "City of London & Wall Street style of Monetarism", please note that it relies very heavily on such things as 1) "fractional reserve lending" (i.e. the almost unbelievable ability of the bankers to "lawfully" create money from nowhere out of nothing and charge interest on it, which the Bank of England has been doing continuously since the 1680s), and 2) "derivatives" gambling: which has played a major role in the multi-trillion Euros (exact size impossible to determine apparently?) form of toxic debts that have become known as "Weapons of mass financial destruction".

The Video Report (of January 13th 2012) referred to above can be viewed at:
http://www.larouchepac.com/node/21166

More information on "fractional reserve lending" can be found via the following link:
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/98259?&condense_comment...77643

and,

more on "derivatives" at:
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/99528?&condense_comment...79613

Constitutionalism, or Totalitarianism: which will it be for the Republic of Ireland?

Mon Jan 16, 2012 08:31

2012 might be the year when this issue gets decided: for once and for all?

Constitutionalism:

"Constitutionalism is descriptive of a complicated concept, deeply
imbedded in historical experience, which subjects the officials who exercise
governmental powers to the limitations of a higher law. Constitutionalism
proclaims the desirability of the rule of law as opposed to rule by the
arbitrary judgment or mere fiat of public officials…. Throughout the literature
dealing with modern public law and the foundations of statecraft the central
element of the concept of constitutionalism is that in political society
government officials are not free to do anything they please in any manner they
choose; they are bound to observe both the limitations on power and the
procedures which are set out in the supreme, constitutional law of the
community. It may therefore be said that the touchstone of constitutionalism is
the concept of limited government under a higher law."

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionalism

Totalitarianism:

"Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a political system where the
state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect
of public and private life wherever feasible."

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism

we 've got to get..

Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:43

..post Ireland, W.

It has to be global first, then we can move in concert...otherwise it'll be NATO jackboots on the ground as quick as you can say desert stormtroopers as Gaeilge.

Meantime though, we can prepare. It has to be holistic, without being totalitarian, constitutionally flexible without surrendering to sophist lawbrokers. Tightrope country.

Good idea; wrong procedure

by Contrarian

Mon Jan 16, 2012 17:52

I am hereby petitioning you with respect in your capacity as Uachtarán na hÉireann to invoke your powers under Article 27.5.1 to call a referendum on the ESM Treaty, a proposal I believe is of such national importance that the will of the people should be accordingly ascertained.

There is little point in citizens petitioning the President in these tems. The Article 27.5.1 power only comes into existence when a majority of Seanad Eireann and at least 1//3 of the members of Dail Eireann petition the President to refer a bill to the people for referendum. Until and unless that happens the President's powers are limited to either signing the bill or referring it to the Supreme Court to test its constitutionality.

Having said that, there is merit in the referendum proposal and I would welcome any move by the Seanad (where the Government parties do not have an absolute majority) to initiate the referendum process on this issue.

Article 27.5.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann (Constitution of the Republic of Ireland)

Tue Jan 17, 2012 12:01

Re: Comment by "Contrarian" at Mon Jan 16, 2012 17:52

I'm not sure that yesterday's comment by Contrarian is entirely correct?

It may be that "Contrarian" is referring (in part) to other relevant statements somewhere else in the Constitution?

Anyway, Article 27.5.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann reads -- in full -- as follows:

5. 1° In every case in which the President decides that a Bill the subject of a petition under this Article contains a proposal of such national importance that the will of the people thereon ought to be ascertained, he shall inform the Taoiseach and the Chairman of each House of the Oireachtas accordingly in writing under his hand and Seal and shall decline to sign and promulgate such Bill as a law unless and until the proposal shall have been approved either

i by the people at a Referendum in accordance with the provisions of section 2 of Article 47 of this Constitution within a period of eighteen months from the date of the President’s decision,

or

ii by a resolution of Dáil Éireann passed within the said period after a dissolution and re-assembly of Dáil Éireann.

The above Article 27.5.1 excerpt has been copied from: http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/upload/static/256.htm

Whatever the exact procedures, and limitations, for calling a referendum in the Republic of Ireland are, information relating to this particular Indymedia Article was sent to the Republic of Ireland Senators this morning by e-mail.

The full text of the e-mail in question, which was copied to President Michael D. Higgins (and to a number of other people), can be viewed at the following address:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/24thSeanadMembers/17J...l.htm

Article 27.1 in full

Tue Jan 17, 2012 17:48

Hi William,

I'm not looking elsewhere in the Constitution; I'm looking at Article 27 in its entirety.

Article 27

This Article applies to any Bill, other than a Bill expressed to be a Bill containing a proposal for the amendment of this Constitution, which shall have been deemed, by virtue of Article 23 hereof, to have been passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas.

1. A majority of the members of Seanad Éireann and not less than one-third of the members of Dáil Éireann may by a joint petition addressed to the President by them under this Article request the President to decline to sign and promulgate as a law any Bill to which this article applies on the ground that the Bill contains a proposal of such national importance that the will of the people thereon ought to be ascertained.

2. Every such petition shall be in writing and shall be signed by the petitioners whose signatures shall be verified in the manner prescribed by law.

3. Every such petition shall contain a statement of the particular ground or grounds on which the request is based, and shall be presented to the President not later than four days after the date on which the Bill shall have been deemed to have been passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas.

4. 1° Upon receipt of a petition addressed to him under this Article, the President shall forthwith consider such petition and shall, after consultation with the Council of State, pronounce his decision thereon not later than ten days after the date on which the Bill to which such petition relates shall have been deemed to have been passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas.

2° If the Bill or any provision thereof is or has been referred to the Supreme Court under Article 26 of this Constitution, it shall not be obligatory on the President to consider the petition unless or until the Supreme Court has pronounced a decision on such reference to the effect that the said Bill or the said provision thereof is not repugnant to this Constitution or to any provision thereof, and, if a decision to that effect is pronounced by the Supreme Court, it shall not be obligatory on the President to pronounce his decision on the petition before the expiration of six days after the day on which the decision of the Supreme Court to the effect aforesaid is pronounced.

5. 1° In every case in which the President decides that a Bill the subject of a petition under this Article contains a proposal of such national importance that the will of the people thereon ought to be ascertained, he shall inform the Taoiseach and the Chairman of each House of the Oireachtas accordingly in writing under his hand and Seal and shall decline to sign and promulgate such Bill as a law unless and until the proposal shall have been approved either

i by the people at a Referendum in accordance with the provisions of section 2 of Article 47 of this Constitution within a period of eighteen months from the date of the President’s decision, or

ii by a resolution of Dáil Éireann passed within the said period after a dissolution and re-assembly of Dáil Éireann.

2° Whenever a proposal contained in a Bill the subject of a petition under this Article shall have been approved either by the people or by a resolution of Dáil Éireann in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this section, such Bill shall as soon as may be after such approval be presented to the President for his signature and promulgation by him as a law and the President shall thereupon sign the Bill and duly promulgate it as a law.

6. In every case in which the President decides that a Bill the subject of a petition under this Article does not contain a proposal of such national importance that the will of the people thereon ought to be ascertained, he shall inform the Taoiseach and the Chairman of each House of the Oireachtas accordingly in writing under his hand and Seal, and such Bill shall be signed by the President not later than eleven days after the date on which the Bill shall have been deemed to have been passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas and shall be duly promulgated by him as a law.

The petition procedure is described in Article 27.1 ie it requires a majority of the Seanad and 1/3 of the Dail to initiate the petition. Article 27.5.1, when referring to "a Bill the subject of a petition under this Article" is referring to a petition in accordance with Article 27.1. There is no other stand alone power conferred on the president to respond to a "citizens" petition and Article 25.2.1 states that "Save as otherwise provided by this Constitution, every Bill so presented to the President for his signature and for promulgation by him as a law shall be signed by the President not earlier than the fifth and not later than the seventh day after the date on which the Bill shall have been presented to him." The only Articles where the Constitution does "otherwise provide" are the Article 26 reference to the Supreme Court procedure and the Article 27.1 petition by the Seanad/Dail.

In many ways it is unfortunate that the Article 27.1 petition is so difficult to invoke as it could usefully function as a check and balance on the power of the Executive. One of the deficiencies of our Constitution is the relative weakness of the Legislative arm of Government compared to the Executive arm. In theory, we have a constitutional separation of powers, but in practise we have a very strong Executive balanced only by an equally strong Judiciary.

Worse still, the two most recent referendums contributed to this trend by increasing the power of the Executive vis-a-vis the Judiciary through the judges' pay provision and by denying the Legislature the powers to conduct enquiries as are the norm in most functioning democracies.

I would love to see the Seanad flex its muscles on the Article 27.1 power if only to act as a watchdog on a Government with such a large majority. Having said all that, I think there is merit in the ESM proposal and I would probably vote in favour of it if it actually did get to a referendum. But the important thing is to actually have that choice!

Article 6.1 (Bunreacht na hEireann) Issues

Wed Jan 18, 2012 10:58

Re: Reply to comment by Contrarian at Tue Jan 17, 2012 17:48

Many thanks for the additional information you have provided.

You have stated: "In many ways it is unfortunate that the Article 27.1 petition is so difficult to invoke as it could usefully function as a check and balance on the power of the Executive."

Personally, I don't feel Article 27.1 is at all difficult to invoke: if, that is, the crucially important "Doctrine of the Tri-Partite Separation of Powers", which is very deeply signalled (and powerfully embedded) in Article 6.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann, was being "lived" in a healthy manner by the majority of the members of all three of the main branches of the Republic of Ireland's present Government (i.e. the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Branches that is).

While I would fully agree that there are some major deficiencies in Bunreacht na hEireann, there is very little that is deficient (in my view) regarding Article 6.1.

At the same time though, there is plenty wrong (as I see things) regarding the way that all three of the main branches of our Government have been failing -- consistently so far, and I would say criminally as well -- to ensure that "the people" of the Republic of Ireland are provided with their constitutional right to have the "final" say regarding the whole matter of our Government bailing out the bankers in connection with the bankers "no limit" set of self-inflicted (and private) gambling debts, which are largely connected with banking "derivatives"; and which could, as I understand it, be in the region of hundreds or even thousands of trillions of Euros. It's little wonder this particular class of toxic debts are often now referred to as "weapons of financial mass destruction"?

Correctly or otherwise, it seems to me that in this case (i.e. the issue of "bankers bailouts"), Article 27 is really in large part a potential safety mechanism: for dealing with the potentially extremely serious and dangerous problems which arise as a consequence of Article 6.1 violations that have already taken place.

In other words, we should (in my view) have had a referendum in the Republic of Ireland a long time ago regarding the "bankers bailout" issue: under the very clear and very democratic "common good" terms of Article 6.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann, which enables "the people" to have the "FINAL" say; and which they are up to now, and at the present time, still being unlawfully denied (in my opinion).

"Derivatives: The $600 Trillion Time Bomb That's Set to Explode"

Wed Jan 18, 2012 16:13

"It's because risk in the $600 trillion derivatives market isn't evening out. To the contrary, it's growing increasingly concentrated among a select few banks, especially here in the United States.

"In 2009, five banks held 80% of derivatives in America. Now, just four banks hold a staggering 95.9% of U.S. derivatives, according to a recent report from the Office of the Currency Comptroller.

"The four banks in question: JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE: JPM), Citigroup Inc. (NYSE: C), Bank of America Corp. (NYSE: BAC) and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (NYSE: GS)."

"Derivatives played a crucial role in bringing down the global economy, so you would think that the world's top policymakers would have reined these things in by now - but they haven't."

"The notional value of the world's derivatives actually is estimated at more than $600 trillion. Notional value, of course, is the total value of a leveraged position's assets. This distinction is necessary because when you're talking about leveraged assets like options and derivatives, a little bit of money can control a disproportionately large position that may be as much as 5, 10, 30, or, in extreme cases, 100 times greater than investments that could be funded only in cash instruments."

The above excerpts have come from the following location:
http://moneymorning.com/2011/10/12/derivatives-the-600-...lode/

"And they're off, with RTE in the lead (I think?) ..."

Fri Jan 20, 2012 07:14

EPM, the "Establishment Propaganda Machinery" as I tend to think of it, appears -- to me at least -- to have started "preparing" the general public for their next step in the direction of full-blooded totalitarianism.

"The latest draft of the EU fiscal treaty makes it 'more likely' that a referendum can be avoided in (the Republic of) Ireland, according to a leading legal expert."

"The draft was published online earlier this evening by the Daily Telegraph."

"Dr Gavin Barrett of the UCD School of Law has said that the new draft seemed to suggest that the 'automatic requirement' for a referendum was now gone and that it was more likely that it could be avoided."

The above three excerpts have come from yesterday's RTE report at:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0119/eutreaty.html

Changing the subject slightly, some readers may be interested to know that the Republic of Ireland Prime Minister Enda Kenny TD was among a group of 80 or so TDs (elected representatives) who was yesterday sent the "Derivatives: The $600 Trillion Time Bomb That's Set to Explode" information in the "Wed Jan 18, 2012 16:13" comment of this Indymedia Article.

For anybody interested, the full text of the e-mail used cane be viewed at:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/Dail31TDs/Group1of2/1...l.htm

Dr Gavin Barrett

Sun Jan 22, 2012 19:33

As it appears to me that law lecturer Dr Gavin Barrett might genuinely not be aware of the "Derivatives: The $600 Trillion Time Bomb That's Set to Explode" report (referred to in the Fri Jan 20, 2012 07:14 comment), an e-mail was sent to him earlier today regarding the matter.

The full text of the e-mail used, copies of which were also sent to RTE broadcasters Dr Miriam O'Callaghan and Gay Byrne, and to the "Bank Occupy Protesters" at Galway, Dublin, London, and New York, can be viewed at the following address:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/DrMiriamOCallaghan/22...l.htm

Similar information was sent yesterday, i.e. January 21st 2012, to (among others) Republic of Ireland Chief Justice Susan Denham and President Michael D. Higgins; and, the e-mail used for that purpose can be viewed at:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/IrishLegalProfessions...l.htm

My hope is that, in connection with developments relating to the "European Stability Mechanism", and the "$600 Trillion Derivatives Time Bomb" business, all concerned will keep the "common good" final-decision (by the people) arrangement, set out in Article 6.1 of the Republic of Ireland's Constitution, very firmly at the forefronts of their minds.

Article 6.1 reads (in full) as follows:

"All powers of government, legislative, executive and judicial, derive, under God, from the people whose right it is to designate the rulers of the State and, in final appeal, to decide all questions of national policy, according to the requirements of the common good."

More RTE and Trinity College Preparatory Work (i.e. propaganda for fooling the general public)

Tue Jan 24, 2012 07:40

"Former German government minister, Joschka Fischer, has warned an Irish audience about the dangers of a collapse of Europe's monetary union."

"Speaking at the Henry Grattan Lecture series last night at Trinity College Dublin, the former German Vice Chancellor and Foreign Minister also likened the rejection of a referendum on the future of Europe to a serious train wreck."

The above excerpts are from the RTE report dated Tuesday 24th January 2012 which can be viewed in full at:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0124/eurozone.html

"Stoppen Sie das Vierte Reich!!" is what I would like to say to Herr Fischer: "if you wish to prevent a serious train wreck for the whole of humanity".

Our "Goody Good" Government (and more sly preparations for fooling the general public yet further)

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:01

It's interesting to note that, right on the heels of yesterday's €1.25bn bailout to the Anglo Irish Bank Bondholders (whoever they are?), which I believe was 100% unconstitutional (and consequently 100% unlawful), our child-like Government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial) is getting top grades from their continental masters; and, appropriately enough (it also appears to me), that this piece of "good news" is being delivered by the very well-oiled and well-heeled "Establishment Media Engine" of The Irish Times.

"Trust in government in Ireland is rising while in Europe it is in decline, according to an annual survey of trust in institutions across the continent."

The above excerpt is from the Article dated January 26th 2012 at the following location:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0126/....html

gold star for Enda from the 1% whom he serves

by lefty

Thu Jan 26, 2012 12:59

Gold star for Enda for getting a compliant population to take it up the ass yet again and let you give their dwindling resources away in bulk to the rich 1% gamblers in the middle of a recession while at home the safety nets built up over the last century are systematically dismantled to turn us into part of a new third world pool of starving desperate cheap labour on the fringes of the EU so european corporations can better compete with the starving and desperate cheap labour pool in china in the coming decades. Full marks Enda.

New World Order.

by Rational Ecologist.

Thu Jan 26, 2012 13:20

The Creed
Banks are more important than people,
Consumption is more important than land, air and water.
Capital is the expression of the worthy human.
Lies are truth.
Democracy is a myth; a chameleon.
Corruption is good and is to be rewarded.
The human heart and spirit is the enemy.
Community and solidarity are evil.
Gecko was right; greed is good.
God help us.
God is a Hedge Fund!

Some crazy facts about bankers, and their grossly corrupt political and legal profession supporters

Thu Jan 26, 2012 18:00

"The scandal involves employees (of 5 major banks) signing names not their own, under titles they did not really have, attesting to the veracity of documents they had not really reviewed. Investigation reveals that it did not just happen occasionally but was an industry-wide practice, dating back to the late 1990s; and that it may have clouded the titles of millions of homes."

"The crazy facts are these: bankers now borrow from their customers and from taxpayers. They are effectively draining funds from household bank accounts, small businesses, corporations, government Treasuries and from e.g. the Federal Reserve. They do so by charging high rates of interest and fees; by demanding early repayment of loans; by illegally foreclosing on homeowners, and by appropriating, and then speculating with trillions of dollars of taxpayer-backed resources."

"Interestingly, countries with strong public sector banking systems largely escaped the 2008 credit crisis. These include the BRIC countries—Brazil Russia, India, and China—which contain 40% of the global population and are today’s fastest growing economies. They escaped because their public sector banks do not need to rely on repos and securitizations to back their loans. The banks are owned and operated by the ultimate guarantor—the government itself. The public sector banking model deserves further study."

The above excerpts are from an Article dated January 26th, 2012 by Ellen Brown (United States Lawyer and Book Author).

The full text of her Article can be viewed at:
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=28878

Overseers if ballot held ?

by T K

Fri Jan 27, 2012 21:45

Even if a referendum is held they will get it passed by hook or crook, we know the drill by now; terrorise a misinformed population or and stuff the ballot boxes with yes returns.

International monitors to oversee the ballot ? I doubt that will happen or if any on the no side would have the wit to apply for such overseeing of the ballot, quite possible that they be would become compromised anyway given the stakes and the players involved.

Grim I know but I think I am correct.

The cunning inversion of the "no alternative" argument

Sat Jan 28, 2012 09:19

Reply to T K at Fri Jan 27, 2012 21:45

I believe all the concerns you have expressed are entirely valid, and it really is a very grim situation indeed which we all find ourselves in just now. The good thing is though, as your comment powerfully demonstrates, more people seem to be realising just how bad and how difficult things are, and how much worse they may yet become.

In the longer term, and with the benefit of hindsight, the "just follow the money" plan has not worked out well for the people of the Republic of Ireland as a whole.

The only workable alternative (that I can think of just now) is for "the people" to switch to a basic "follow the Constitution" plan: particularly with regard to the core part of our Constitution, as represented by the contents of Article 6.1.

If enough people were to do that, and if they were to take all of the peaceful, respectful, and lawful steps available to them to make it clear to our Government (Executive, Legislative and Judicial) that we now wish to try and learn from our basic mistake, by making a dramatic change of direction (in a timely fashion), then we might still have a chance?

The argument being used by our politicians that there is "no alternative" to bailing out the bankers in connection with their multi-trillion Euros "derivatives" gambling debts is, and always has been, a complete lie (as far as I'm concerned at least). And, when very senior politicians refer to such debts as "our debts", as I have heard at least one of them do on RTE in the past few days, then they are very significantly and very fraudulently compounding that basic lie (in my view).

The truth of the matter (as far as I'm concerned) is that -- from the very outset -- our Government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial) never had "any (lawful) alternative" other than to either totally refuse to pay any of these self-inflicted "derivatives" gambling debts belonging to the reckless and greed-ridden bankers, or, if the bullying from the bankers got strong enough, to then publicly put the whole matter to the people of the Republic of Ireland using a constitutional referendum. That way, the people of the Republic of Ireland could, under the very clear, very healthy, and very sensible terms of Article 6.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann, which is the highest law of the land, have the "final" say on the whole matter: where "final" actually meant "final".

Instead of doing either of those two things, our Government (Executive, Legislative and Judicial) "went down an entirely wrong road" (in my opinion).

In itself, and in the particular set of circumstances concerned, for our Government to have "taken the wrong road" was not necessarily "the end of the world" (it seems to me). Governments, like individual people, can learn from mistakes -- provided of course they have what it takes to honestly face up to their mistakes, and to then deal with them in a responsible manner -- and, for a limited period of time, I believe our Government's basic mistake regarding this gambling-debt bailout matter still could be reversed.

However, to keep on "going down the wrong road" in the way our Government (Executive, Legislative and Judicial) still seems to be doing -- i.e. for our Government to keep on paying bailout money to the bankers in connection with their "derivatives" gambling debts, even when there is now good reason to believe that the overall size of the debts in question might be hundreds, or even thousands of trillions of Euros, then that really is extremely worrying (for me at least).

Additionally, with the thought that history often repeats its basic patterns, and as some will already know, Seneca's very tidy piece of good advice (please see below) failed to register with Nero.

"Errare humanum est; perseverare diabolicum."
(Seneca the Younger, Roman Emperor Nero's Principal Adviser, circa 4 BC – 65 AD)

"To err is human; to persist [with error] is [the work] of the devil."

"Hedging & Derivative Risks Becomes Infinite Risk"

Mon Jan 30, 2012 09:35

"The $700 trillion derivatives-hedge funds market is leveraged anywhere from 35 to 70 times. Citibank was leveraged at 280:1 The minimum risk of high leverage on a rising market becomes infinite risk as it unwinds rapidly."

The two excerpts above are from the following Internet location:
http://www.ied.info/articles/an-honest-bank-is-so-simpl...-risk

It seems to me that it's now time, and well past time in fact, that the key role being played by "Derivatives" was firmly brought into the general public discussions regarding the desperate need (as I see things) for a Republic of Ireland referendum of the kind that has the potential to bring to an end -- which is final -- to all bank bailouts connected with the "derivatives gambling debts" of the bankers, by the Republic of Ireland Government.

The subject of "Derivatives", and "Fractional Reserve Lending" (a nasty and massive piece of outrageous global fraud if ever there was one, that was started by the Bank of England in the 1690s and going on ever since, and almost certainly the greatest piece of fraud the world has ever know) -- which it could perhaps be argued is the "Mother and Father of the Derivatives Child" -- lays at the heart of the now totally impossible to remedy (I suspect) dysfunctional "money-supply" mess the Global Banking Cartel have saddled most of the world with: but, which they continue to take absolutely no responsibility whatsoever for (as far as I know).

Very luckily for the Global Banking Cartel, all members of our Republic of Ireland Government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial) are keeping their mouths very firmly shut about "Derivatives", and "Fractional Reserve Lending": as are all of our Establishment Media Propaganda Engines (to the best of my knowledge).

All of our politicians and lawyers, and all of our MSM (Main Stream Media) personnel, all seem to know very well "which side their bread is buttered on" it would appear?

The Shadow Banking System, and the estimated "quadrillion plus" Euros worth of associated bankers "gambling debts"

Mon Feb 13, 2012 12:55

Those who wish to try and better understand the full range and extent of the overall difficulties connected with the present set of global "money-supply" problems, who have not already done so, might benefit (in my opinion) from a basic knowledge of the "Shadow Banking System" (SBS).

"The shadow banking system is the collection of financial entities, infrastructure and practices which support financial transactions that occur beyond the reach of existing state sanctioned monitoring and regulation. It includes entities such as hedge funds, money market funds and structured investment vehicles. Investment banks may conduct much of their business in the shadow banking system (SBS), but they are not SBS institutions themselves." (From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banking_system )

"Well we now know that the global 'derivatives market' is gigantic, with over a quadrillion (thousand trillion!) dollars worth of pure unregulated trans-national gambling debts floating around." (From: http://truedemocracyparty.net/2011/12/secret-bankruptcy...nges/ )

"I think a less well understood category of investments are derivatives which get their name because they are 'derived from other underlying investments' or because the value of the specific derivative investment fluctuates in value based on changes in value of something else (investment values, interest rates, exchange rates, etc)". (From: http://wheredoesallmymoneygo.com/the-basic-types-of-der...ined/ )

"How to loot nations and their banks legally"

Thu Feb 16, 2012 14:57

"To give a concrete example. Spain or Greece puts its tax payer money in to one of its insolvent banks. That bank then uses that money to get a short term repo or hypothecated it for loan. Or it uses it to hedge its currency problems via a currency swap or buys CDS insurance on assets it is deeply worried about. If the weak bank then goes down all those assets are seized by the big bank who was lending or was the counter-party to the derivative deals. The tax payer gets zero. And there is no redress. It was legally done. And the money the Big bank would have used to get themselves into this position would be the bail out money we had earlier given to the mega banks. They would have used that money against us – again."

"But if I am not wrong, then the banks have created a financial Armageddon looting machine. Their Plan B is a mechanism to loot not just the more vulnerable banks in weaker nations, but those nations themselves. And the looting will not take months not even days. It could happen in hours if not minutes. Our leaders would have only a few hours to decide who they would side with: the banks or us. The past four years give me no faith they would chose us."

All three of the above excerpts, written by documentary film-maker David Malone, have come from the following location:
http://www.golemxiv.co.uk/2011/12/plan-b-how-to-loot-na...ally/

Bankers gambling debts are "odious debts" in international law

Fri Feb 17, 2012 11:16

"In international law, odious debt is a legal theory that holds that the national debt incurred by a regime for purposes that do not serve the best interests of the nation, should not be enforceable. Such debts are, thus, considered by this doctrine to be personal debts of the regime that incurred them and not debts of the state. In some respects, the concept is analogous to the invalidity of contracts signed under coercion."

"When a despotic regime contracts a debt, not for the needs or in the interests of the state, but rather to strengthen itself, to suppress a popular insurrection, etc, this debt is odious for the people of the entire state. This debt does not bind the nation; it is a debt of the regime, a personal debt contracted by the ruler, and consequently it falls with the demise of the regime. The reason why these odious debts cannot attach to the territory of the state is that they do not fulfil one of the conditions determining the lawfulness of State debts, namely that State debts must be incurred, and the proceeds used, for the needs and in the interests of the State. Odious debts, contracted and utilised for purposes which, to the lenders' knowledge, are contrary to the needs and the interests of the nation, are not binding on the nation – when it succeeds in overthrowing the government that contracted them – unless the debt is within the limits of real advantages that these debts might have afforded. The lenders have committed a hostile act against the people, they cannot expect a nation which has freed itself of a despotic regime to assume these odious debts, which are the personal debts of the ruler."

The above excerpts have come from the following location:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odious_debt

Bring on the Germans.

by On-the-Dole.

Sun Feb 19, 2012 20:46

It is to be hoped that Teutonic German efficiency will be imposed on RTE and the bloated Irish public sector.
Same as They did to the Greeks.
The Germans pay the Irish public sector wages right now.
The Irish public sector are on the dole.

On the dole too wahoo!

by Chinaman - welfare frauder

Sun Feb 19, 2012 23:12

Bring on the Chinese-we need them

sick of this financial and government doublespeak

by CorporateWelfare

Mon Feb 20, 2012 01:11

the biggest welfare cases ARE the german banks!
we're paying out more in corporate welfare than social welfare.
of course, FG aren't threatening to cut THEIR dole though.

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Human Rights in Ireland

Lockdown Skeptics

Petition to the President for a Referendum

Comments (31 of 31)