Has President Higgins overstepped the mark?

Looking on the positive side, I have no doubt that a committed Gaelgeoir like Stumpy Dee will write his bestselling memoirs only in our native tongue.

A true patriot like him wouldn't be interested in making (more) money, he'd be far more interested in being remembered in Irish History as the heroic Minister for Miscellaneous Gobshitery who fearlessly abolished Section 31 of the Broadcasting Act so we could all hear what Gerry Adams really sounds like on the RTE News.

Mary McAleese was an excellent President.

Everyone felt proud of her because she stayed above the political fray and sought to unify, not divide.

She and her husband were outstanding on the peace process which required tremendous instincts in a girl from Ardoyne. Culminating in the visit of Queen Elizabeth.

Like Mary Robinson she had a lawyer’s respect for the Constitution. As we see from her subsequent battles with the Catholic Hierarchy, she never lacked conviction, she just understood the Office to which the Irish people had elected her and she didn’t attempt to self-aggrandise (the ultimate fault in our current President)

Where will we find someone of that calibre now? Will we have a repeat for 2011 - false prophets like Norris and Gallagher fall away and the prize goes to the last candidate standing?

Lot of anger here lately..

The Aras should be worried by these poll results (which the Sindo buried at the bottom of their long report).

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/poll-nation-wants-a-general-election-now-despite-government-vow-to-go-full-term-to-next-year/a1808610656.html

People are evenly split on the first question although it is skewed in favour of the President. The key issue is not whether the President should write to his Iranian counterpart but whether he should have written in such fawning, uncritical terms.

Let's have a poll on this question - "Was the President's right not to mention human rights in his letter congratulating the President of Iran?".

The results on the second question is even more worrying for the Aras. The narrowest majority (51%) of respondents supported his right to participate in current political debates. Again, the question is skewed in his favour.

How about a poll asking the fundamental, constitutional issue - "Should the President criticise Government policy in public?". Come to think of it, we will have a nationwide poll next year where this should be the central question (but we will pretend its about anything and everything else)

Respondents were almost evenly split on whether Michael D Higgins should have written a letter congratulating Iran’s new president earlier this year, with 39pc believing he was right and 40pc believing he was wrong to do so.

A growing number of people believe it is wrong for the President to participate in current political debates, with 41pc of that view, up from 28pc in August’s poll. A slim majority (51pc), however, supported Mr Higgins’s right to speak out, with 8pc having no opinion.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/poll-nation-wants-a-general-election-now-despite-government-vow-to-go-full-term-to-next-year/a1808610656.html

Yes, Higgins has overstepped the mark, and not for the first time either …

Said it before and I'll say it again, he needs to be reigned in. Was wondering why he was so quiet last week, so I did a bit of googling and found the below. Can we send him over to visit Charles and Camilla for a few weeks to keep him quiet?

https://president.ie/en/media-library/news-releases/a-state-visit-by-the-president-of-the-socialist-republic-of-vietnam-announced-by-aras-an-uachtarain

the IDF had told the UN to withdraw their personnel from the posts close to the blue line

That's a clear threat. The IDF were not asking.

Parking up beside the Polish and Irish is also threatening their safety and making them shields.

Mickey talks a load of bollíx at the best of times, but he spot on this one.

It is only a matter of time before a UN soldier is injured or killed.

The top of the UN unfortunately lack anything resembling a back bone or a conscience.

Israel has no right to be there in the first place

They're at war in fairness. Diplomatic niceties tend to go out the window.

Some mandate! Makes a mockery of UN peacekeeping and turns our troops into hostages. Hezbollah don't need to threaten UNIFIL. They just murdered an Irish soldier and that was enough to stop UNIFIL interfering with the rocket launchers which began raining missiles down on Israeli civilians as soon as their buddies in Hamas went on their murderous rampage one year ago (which the President never condemned, even when he met families of their hostages!).

In any case, this thread is not about Lebanon/Israel, this is about the President's constitutional role and the government's failure to assert its proper role. Once again, he has over-stepped the mark by getting into the most controversial and sensitive foreign policy area.

Take down your copy of Bunreacht na hÉireann. Read closely Article 13.9

The powers and functions conferred on the President by this Constitution shall be exercisable and performable by him only on the advice of the Government, save where it is provided by this Constitution that he shall act in his absolute discretion or after consultation with or in relation to the Council of State, or on the advice or nomination of, or on receipt of any other communication from, any other person or body.

Article 28.4.1 makes clear that foreign policy is a matter for the Government.

Therefore, the President can only act "on the advice of the Government" in dealing with foreign policy but he has staked out a role for himself in this field which is creating confusion about Ireland's foreign policy.

Why are the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste yielding to this power-grab?

There is no threat. Stop making things up. Andrea Tenenti, Unifil’s spokesman, has said that they have not been threatened. The IDF has asked them to move for their own safety. Hezbollah has killed Irish soldiers in the past, fyi.

That's a picture of a tank. UNIFIL have said there is no threat. I'll take their word for it.

Those UN forces are meant to protect both populations

Seeing how Israelis had to leave settlements all along their own border due to constant attacks from north over these UN forces

Someone failed to do their job

How would you describe yourself? 🙂

More of a little midget parasite I'd say…

And that’s just the letter to Iran.

the letter to iran was just diplomacy.

Yeah, "sucking up to the Ayatollahs in defiance of our Constitution" diplomacy

In keeping with our constitution? Read my post #973

Not sucking up? Just read his sycophantic drivel.

Not so much as a hint about the terrible crimes of the Ayatollahs. Not even a suggestion they might go easy when lashing those women! Or that they might not string up the gays. And what a pity their minions in Hezbollah murdered that young private from Donegal. No, our President only wants to praise Iran's culture and its "crucial role" in promoting peace in the region! No wonder the Iranians put it on their Embassy website.

Has any Irish leader ever written a more embarrassing letter to a foreigner? Normal diplomacy? What a lie!!

No muppet was he.

He oversaw the mass executions of 10,000 left-wing opponents of the Ayatollah.

But repeated condolences from our President for his "tragic" death. What game is our President playing? Nothing that our Constitution allows in any case.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/05/iran-president-raisis-death-must-not-deny-victims-of-his-grim-human-rights-legacy-their-right-to-accountability/

Do you have a link for that claim? I know the Taoiseach and Tánaiste tried to muddy the waters by saying it is "normal" to write such letters but, as I said repeatedly, the problem is not that the President wrote to his Iranian counterpart - it is that he wrote fawning drivel which was not approved by the Government, which grossly misrepresents our policy towards Iran and fails to even hint at the regime's appalling abuses.

I don't believe for a moment that Mary Robinson or Mary McAleese or their predecessors would have written a letter like this because (a) they respected the constitutional limits of their office and (b) they would puke if the Government told them to sign it.

Simple - if it had been, that’s the first thing the President would have said in his own defence.

Instead he dodged the question and tried to blame the Israelis, leading to the most embarrassing press conference by any Irish President

President Higgins oversteps the mark again and in a most fundamental constitutional area.

Yesterday, the President signed into law the Planning and Development Act 2023, an enormous piece of legislation which the Government says is aimed at fixing our dysfunctional planning system. The Opposition were strongly critical of the Bill at all stages, and especially of the speed with which it went through the Oireachtas.

The President decided not to exercise his constitutional prerogative to refer the Bill to the Supreme Court under Article 26.1.1. However, he decided to jump into the controversy by issuing a statement yesterday which says that

The President is of the view that, in this instance, the issue of potential unconstitutionality contained in the provisions of the Planning and Development Bill 2023 would be more appropriately tested by means of an action determined primarily on proven facts, rather than by way of an Article 26 referral.

So the President is joining publicly with the Opposition to express his concern about the "potential unconstitutionality" of the Bill but he won't use his prerogative to get a Supreme Court judgement. His statement spells out why:

no Court can question the validity of any legislation following a referral by the President to the Supreme Court.

Under Article 34.3, if the Bill passed muster with the Supreme Court, it would become law and be immune from constitutional challenge. Instead, the President is inviting opponents of the Bill to bring their own constitutional challenges (at our expense!).

I don't know if the Planning and Development Act 2023 will help or hinder planning and development in Ireland. Still less do I know whether some aspects of the Act are contrary to the Constitution. But it is an outrageous abuse of office for the President of Ireland to sign legislation into law while publicly announcing to its opponents that he has done so in order to leave the door open to constitutional challenges to that legislation.

https://president.ie/en/media-library/news-releases/president-higgins-signs-the-planning-and-development-bill-2023