Irish Free State.

Waikato Times, Volume 121, Issue 20230, 26 June 1937, Page 15 (Supplement)

Irish Free State.

Proposed Constitution. :: Empire Relationships.

(Professor Berriedale Keith in Manchester Guardian.)

A AFTER THE SPLENDID EXORDIUM it is depressing to find the Constitution of Eire devoid of that spirit of Christian goodwill which would be its natural sequel. We all rejoice that Eire should be declared a sovereign independent democratic State, but we should have welcomed a repetition of the present assertion that the State forms part of the British Commonwealth of Nations. It would have been simple to qualify such an assertion by a clear intimation of the voluntary character of that association. Instead, only in article 2y, dealing with external affairs, have we, in singularly inelegant phraseology, a reference to the possible use of the organ, instrument, or method of procedure used by the members of any group or league of nations with which Eire is associated, for Issues of External Relations,

It is a misfortune that the Crown was not mentioned straightforwardly, and its use authorised, as it is at present, for the conclusion of treaties and the making of diplomatic appointments. It is now clear that under the new Constitution the Government of Eire may exercise every function of external affairs without the use of the name of the orown. If the name Republic is avoided the fact remains that the State will be able to act precisely as one. On the other hand, nothing is actually laid down which would render impossible the maintenance of the present British rights as to defence, though the existence of these rights would enable any foreign Power at war with Britain to decline to recognise neutrality if proclaimed, as it could be, by Eire.

Provocative also is the claim that the national territory includes the whole of Ireland and that the Government and Parliament of Eire have the right to exercise jurisdiction over the whole area. Happily there is clear intimation that there is no intention to make use of the right, but the assertion of the claim, coupled with the omission of acceptance of membership of the British Commonwealth, must be justly resented by Northern Ireland. It is fair to say that article 44 regarding religion la wisely framed, but the reference to the “special position” of the Roman Church must inevitably be a cause of offending. Of the sincerity of Mr. De Valera’s religious faith there can be no doubt, but Charity Seems Sadly Lacking in both Irelands. It seems most regrettable that the Constitution was not confined to the Free State area, with provision for the admission of Northern Ireland on terms to be agreed upon between the Parliaments. In its domestic aspect the Constitution has many merits. The President, who replaces the Governor-General, is granted those powers whose denial rendered the representative of the Crown a mere figurehead. The right to refuse a dissolution to a Prime Minister who has ceased to command a majority in the Dail is given, but it may be accorded in the President’s absolute discretion. He is not given the right to dismiss a Ministry which still commands the support of the Dail, even if he believes it to have lost the support of the electorate; but he has real authority to safeguard the Constitution. Thus he may refuse to allow the Dail to rush through a bill so as to negative the Senate’s power of delay; he may refer to the Supreme Court any _ bill which he deems repugnant to the Constitution, and if it reports repugnancy he is required to refuse his signature to the measure He may on the request of a majority

of the Senate and a third of the Dail refuse to sign a bill of national importance until it has been approved by referendum or a general election. He may veto alteration of the Constitution by simple Act during the three years in which such a mode of change is allowed, and so compel the use of the referendum, which happily is to be the normal method of procedure. In the exercise of his powers as to bills he must consult the Council of State, but Need Not Accept Its Advice. This interesting innovation is composed of members ex officio, and up to seven nominees of the President, and may prove useful as a band of elder statesmen. With these powers and the prestige of office the President will be a rival in popular esteem of the Prime Minister, who is to bear the style of Taoiseach. He, however, like Mr Baldwin, Is to be master In his household; he selects his colleagues and can remove them at will; he can advise a dissolution regardless of their views, so long as he has not been defeated in the Dail. If, however, he should fail to advise the summoning of that body the President might convene it, and if he failed to resign on defeat he could doubtless dismiss him. The Government is not unduly subordinated to the Dail; it can make treaties without its consent, unless a charge on public funds is involved, though Parliament alone can make a treaty part of the domestic law of the State. For a declaration of war the assent of the Dail is required, but the Government may take measures to meet attack pending the assembling of the Dail. The Re-creation of a Senate is satisfactory, though its powers are needlessly restricted. It will be able to make minor amendments in all but money bills and can ask for a referendum on important measures. The provision of representation of the universities therein is some compensation for the exclusion of their members from the Dail. The retention of Proportional Representation for that body is a gratifying sign of moderation and will gave the State from the evils of a Government with a majority wholly disproportionate to the votes cast in the elections. An ingenious method has been devised to solve the problem of the validity of the new Constitution, which patently departs from the treaty of 1921, which under the Constitution of 1922 was the supreme law of the land. The existing judges must either retire from office or swear to give effect to the new measure. The fact that it will be approved by popular vote will doubtless afford full justification for their continuance in office. An innovation of dubious merit is the restriction to the Supreme Court of all questions of the validity of any law, but the Court will be strengthened to enable it effectively to play this part. Unfortunately nothing is done to strengthen the security for the liberty of the subject. Special tribunals and military tribunals are contemplated, and a new provision suggests that The Radio, The Press, and the Cinema will be subjected to further control in the interests of public order, morality, and the authority of the State. There is danger m this impatience of criticism. Intellectual liberty is far from secure under an unintelligent censorship, and the imposition of the burden of compulsory knowledge of Irish is a sufficient handicap to the advance of learning in the State without adding refusal of access to the widest range of English and foreign literature.