Referendum In Ireland Research Articles

Direct democracy and equality: context is the key

AbstractDirect democratic instruments are increasingly applied in many European countries. They are subject to an ongoing public—and often highly controversial—debate. The question of how direct democracy relates to equality, i.e. if direct democratic instruments have the potential to foster equality or if they lead to more inequality, is crucial in this debate. Research has struggled to come up with a general answer to this question with scholars assuming equality as well as inequality-promoting effects of direct democratic outputs. In this paper, we try to shed new light on this controversial debate and argue that the impact of direct democracy on equality essentially depends on the social and political context in which the decisions take place. In order to examine the impact of context factors on direct democratic outputs, we first analyze the influence of country-specific variables such as the level of equality and the age of democracy—applying large-N multilevel logistic regressions. Yet, these statistical analyses offer no clear results: the effects of the country-specific variables are rather blurry and hard to make meaning of. The result suggests that other factors than the ones we included in the regressions are decisive for the effect of direct democratic instruments on equality. Therefore, in a second step, we demonstrate how country-and case-specific variables such as social and political characteristics impact the outcomes of direct democracy, using the same-sex marriage referendums in Ireland and Slovenia in 2015 as examples. We conclude that context factors are too complex to be grasped in a large-N, statistical analysis. This means that to understand how context influences the effects of direct democratic instruments on equality, for now, one has to go beyond the lens of statistical analysis and look at the respective cases in great depth and detail.

Philosophy of Law or Philosophy of Reason –The Idea of a Treaty Establishing a Constitution for the European Union

The main purpose of the study is to analyze the feasibility and necessity of an EU Constitution. Briefly, the history of the draft constitution is as follows: The draft treaty aims to codify the two main treaties of the European Union - the Treaty of Rome of 1957 and the Treaty of Maastricht of 1992, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam (1997) and the Treaty of Nice (2001). The debate on the future of Europe is believed to have begun with a speech by German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer in Berlin in 2000. The process began after the Laeken Declaration, when the European Convention was set up, chaired by former French President Valerie Giscard d'Estaing, with the aim of drafting a constitution. The draft contract was published in July 2003. After lengthy discussions and debates over the proposal for qualified majority voting, the final text was approved in June 2004 and signed by representatives of the Member States on 29 October 2004. The failure of the treaty in France and the Netherlands is a serious blow to the European Union because these two countries are considered to be loyal supporters of the European project. The text of the treaty was subsequently rewritten by the Amato Group, officially the Active Committee on European Democracy (ACED), a group of high-ranking European politicians. During the German presidency of the Union, a new treaty was proposed - the Treaty of Lisbon - to replace the original draft of the Constitution. On 12 June 2008, the Lisbon Treaty was also rejected in a referendum in Ireland. But if we want to look beyond history, we can ask - Why does the EU need a Constitution and how can the Constitution be the roadmap to an advanced future for the EU? The answers to this question can be found by analyzing several directions (these are the main points of the article): historical reflexivity; socio-cultural analysis of the philosophical concepts of well-known political and social philosophers such as Immanuel Kant, John Locke; the modern constellation through the prism of Jürgen Habermas and the decision to make a text as a Constitution which its aim is to reach the starting point of an entire community like the EU. Keywords: constitution, EU, philosophy, law, John Locke, Immanuel Kant, Jurgen Habermas

Does Social Media Use Matter? A Case Study of the 2018 Irish Abortion Referendum

The role of social media at electoral events is much speculated upon. Wide-ranging effects, and often critical evaluations, are attributed to commentary, discussions, and advertising on Facebook, Twitter, Telegram, and many other platforms. But the specific effects of these social media during campaigns, especially referendum campaigns, remain under-studied. This thematic issue is a very valuable contribution for precisely this reason. Using the 2018 abortion referendum in Ireland as an illustrative case, this commentary argues for greater research on social media at referendum campaigns, more critical evaluation of the claims and counterclaims about social media effects, often aired widely without substantive evidence, and, finally, for robust, coordinated cross-national regulation of all digital platforms in line with global democratic norms.

Voting in referendums increases internal political efficacy of men but not women: evidence from Ireland's 2018 abortion referendum

ABSTRACT Will experience with direct democracy influence men's and women's political beliefs differently? Despite the closed gender gap in voter turnout, women remain less interested in politics and participate less frequently in non-voting activities than men. Scholars find women's lower sense of internal political efficacy as the origins of these gender gaps. In this paper, I examine whether the experience of direct participation in political decision-making alters women's feelings of internal political efficacy differently from it does men's. Building on the insights from the literature on the gendered psychological traits, I theorize that voting in referendums will promote men's internal political efficacy but not women's, because of women's greater susceptibility to the psychological costs of participation in referendums. Using an original panel survey conducted shortly before and after the 2018 abortion referendum in Ireland, I demonstrate the presence of the gendered effect in voting in referendums: While men reported increased internal political efficacy after voting in the referendum, women did not experience any meaningful change, even though the issue magnified women's psychological engagement with the vote. My findings suggest that differences in psychological dispositions between men and women create gendered reactions to citizen experience in the political arena.

Some Reflections Concerning Referendums in Ireland

We live in times in which referendums have recently been major news in a variety of jurisdictions, but most especially of course the United Kingdom, the political system of which remains even now convulsed by the efforts it is making to come to terms with the referendum vote of 23 June 2016 to leave the European Union, and Spain, where the implications of the controversial Catalan independence referendum held on 1 October 2017 (having earlier been declared illegal by the Constitutional Court of Spain) continue to reverberate with uncertain long-term constitutional implications. The present paper involves a modest attempt to bring some comparative perspective to bear deriving from a jurisdiction which, for better or for worse, has a reasonably lengthy history of dealing with referendums: that of Ireland. More specifically, this paper seeks to reflect briefly a number of phenomena that have become features of the Irish referendum landscape, and that seem to me to be interesting from a comparative perspective.

Are the people the masters? Constitutional Referendums in Ireland

According to some, we are now living in the ‘Age of the Referendum’. But the rise of the referendum is fraught with worry it will usher in a crude populism which will obliterate constitutional constraints and lead – ironically - to executive dominance, authoritarianism and deep forms of democratic decay. Therefore, whilst referendums hold out the promise of constitutional self-government, we need to be mindful of the pitfalls and problems they bring in their wake. In exploring the potential—and the pitfalls—of a democratic constitutionalist vision, Ireland offers a promising testing ground. On the surface, one might think that Ireland’s referendum process would fall victim to many of the common concerns about referendums. In initiation and formulation, the process is open to elite capture because the government gets to propose and formulate the referendum proposal which is put to the people. The process is purely majoritarian; 50% plus one of the voters on referendum day can approve any change. Any change can be proposed, however radical. Minority rights have been put to referendum vote. Ireland’s rules and regulation of campaign advertising and debate are loose and scant and seem unlikely to combat disinformation. Yet, when examined closely, Ireland stands as a counterpoint to many of the criticisms and fears which surround referendums. Elite dominance, though formally prevalent, is offset by a substantial role for civil society in initiation and campaigning. Bare majority vote is supplemented by widespread participation and deliberation, which appears to be nuanced and robust, whilst minority rights have been vindicated when voted on. The process has not been subject to political exploitation for sweeping or abusive constitutional change. Though the record is far from perfect, referendums work reasonably well in Ireland, commanding high levels of popular participation and engagement, which go well beyond the mere act of ratifying or rejecting a referendum proposal at the ballot box and extend to widespread, relatively well-informed and committed popular deliberation. During a constitutional referendum in Ireland, a national conversation takes place about what people want their Constitution to mean. As such, Ireland is a crucial case-study in exploring the promise - and perils - of constitutional referendums.

Economic Voting in EU Referendums: Sociotropic versus Egocentric Voting in the Lisbon Treaty Plebiscites in Ireland

Economic voting is one of the most studied aspects of electoral behaviour. The dominant view is that sociotropic economic considerations are more important to voters in national elections. However, other research suggests that utilitarian motivations are key to understanding support for the EU. An EU integration referendum offers the opportunity to explore whether and when sociotropic or utilitarian motivations are more important in determining vote choice. The unusual combination of two successive referendums in Ireland on the Lisbon Treaty, either side of the global financial crisis, provides the ideal opportunity to test these assumptions. Using data from two post-referendum surveys, we demonstrate that the economy mattered in both referendums but that different economic motivations drove vote choice in each, with sociotropic motivations more critical as a result of the global financial crisis. Our study has implications for economic voting and referendums and demonstrates that context is crucial in determining a voter’s economic motivations in a plebiscite.

Vaccines and the fetus

After the abortion referendum in Ireland, ethical debates on the treatment of fetal material loom on the horizon. George Winter weighs the influence of the Church against the medical advances

Polling ‘misses’ – can Q-methodology help? A case study of the Seanad referendum

ABSTRACT Accurate information on public opinion is a necessary condition for the effective functioning of democracies. For Lasswell, the open interplay of public opinion with policy is the ‘distinguishing mark of popular rule’ [Lasswell, H. D. (1941). Democracy through public opinion. Menasha, WI: Banta]. Yet, despite its importance, there is a distinct gap in methods and tools to understand large volumes of public opinion statements on any issue. The 2013 referendum in Ireland on the abolition of the Seanad (Senate) was a prominent example of this gap. Opinion polls were perceived as misleading in suggesting that the referendum was going to pass. Aiming to address opinion noise, and the polarity suggested by opinion polls, we conducted an online study of subjectivity in the week before polling. Using Q-methodology and the stream of public opinion generated during the campaign, we identified three main perspectives on the issue of Seanad abolition. One perspective was in favour of abolition, two opposed the proposal. We conclude that Q-methodology could be used to support opinion polling and political communication by providing a supporting context of the range of social perspectives on the issue at hand.

The Lisbon Treaty and the Accession of Turkey to the European Union

On December 13, 2007, the Member States of the European Union (EU) signed in Lisbon a treaty amending the founding Treaties of the EU. After a troubled ratification process, due to the adverse outcome of a national referendum in Ireland, the Lisbon Treaty finally entered into force on December 1, 2009, defining a new trajectory for the EU integration process. The present article addresses the possible implications of the recent EU treaty reform to the accession of Turkey to the EU. To that end, I propose an analysis of the modifications introduced in the institutional framework of the Union and I inquire whether the legal change at this level is capable of influencing the attitude of the current Member States concerning the accession of Turkey to the EU.

The use of referendums in Ireland: an analysis

ABSTRACTThe referendum is a phenomenon which is becoming increasingly normalised in the constitutional practice of many countries. Ireland is an EU member state with particularly extensive experience of the referendum as a decision-making tool. To date, it has held 39 referendums on a variety of issues – ranking it among the top four states in Western Europe in this regard.This article seeks to review the emergence of referendums in Ireland as a decision-making instrument and to ask what constitutional, legal or institutional factors have led to referendums enjoying such comparatively extensive use there. It seeks to examine which political issues have formed the subject of referendums in Ireland, and to investigate what kinds of issues have succeeded in gaining electoral approval and what kinds have not. The extent of electoral participation in (and thus representativity of) Irish referendums is also scrutinised, and factors affecting participation rates examined.

Understanding the 2015 marriage referendum in Ireland: context, campaign, and conservative Ireland

ABSTRACTOn 22 May 2015 the marriage referendum proposal was passed by a large majority of Irish voters and the definition of marriage in the constitution was broadened to introduce marriage equality. This referendum is remarkable for a number of reasons: (1) it is uniquely based on an experiment in deliberative democracy; (2) the referendum campaign was unusually vigorous and active; and (3) the voting patterns at the referendum point to a significant value shift along the deep seated liberal conservative political cleavage of Irish politics. This article provides an overview of the background to the referendum initiative, the campaign prior to the referendum, and the key factors that drove voter turnout and preference. Based on a post-referendum survey, we find that while support for the government of the day, political knowledge, and social attitudes have the same effects as commonly found in other referendums, the variation among social classes was less prevalent than usual and door-to-door canvassing by the two sides of the campaign impacted through turnout rather than vote preference. The voting behaviour of the different age groups suggests strong generational effects.

The Fiscal Stability Treaty Referendum 2012

This report documents the Irish Fiscal Stability Treaty referendum campaign of 2012. Beginning with a brief economic background of the Eurozone crisis, it provides an outline of the main treaty provisions. It discusses the role of the Referendum Commission, documents the main campaign forces and compares their stances in previous European Union Treaty referendums in Ireland. The report considers the main campaign issues that dominated the referendum debate and provides a short account of public opinion. It concludes with an overview of the results and a note on some of the factors that may have accounted for the Yes side's victory in the campaign.

The EU’s Democratic Deficit and Repeated Referendums in Ireland

This analysis tackles the question of whether the democratic deficit in the European Union is associated with repeated referendums—giving voters a second chance to vote “yes” for EU treaties. Looking at repeated referendums in Ireland on the Nice and Lisbon treaties, I argue that, broadly speaking, these referendums failed to give Irish voters the meaningful ability to contest the direction of EU policy or to choose among alternative policy options, an example of how the democratic deficit can endure even when the EU incorporates electoral mechanisms. I first discuss how this theoretical insight is evidenced by five aspects of the Irish referendums. Then, I examine three of these aspects more closely in case studies of the Nice and Lisbon referendums, focusing on how leaders (1) conceptualized the failure of the initial referendums as deriving from voter incomprehension, (2) planned repeated referendums in an additional effort to ratify the treaties, and (3) mobilized “yes” voters through extreme predictions about the consequences of second “no” outcomes. I conclude by discussing socio-economic trends seen from 2003 to 2014 and their implications for issues related to the EU’s democratic deficit.

The Lisbon Experience in Ireland: ‘No’ in 2008 but ‘Yes’ in 2009 – How and Why?

In June 2008, the Irish electorate rejected the Lisbon Treaty in a referendum. Sixteen months later, voters went back to the polls and overwhelmingly backed the Treaty in a rerun referendum with 69 per cent voting ‘yes’. What explains this change of heart? This report provides a detailed review of the 2009 Lisbon Treaty referendum in Ireland. The paper argues that the switch from ‘no’ to ‘yes’ is explained not only by the changed economic circumstances the country faced but also by the guarantees secured by the government from their EU counterparts on the issues of tax and the EU Commissioner, a more informed electorate and a better campaign from those advocating a ‘yes’ vote. This conclusion undermines the view that the referendum was simply ‘second order’ in nature and that national political considerations such as the economy were the sole factors in explaining the switch from ‘no’ to ‘yes’. The report also concludes that ‘campaigns matter’ in Irish EU referendums because of the unfamiliar partisan configuration that voters are faced with.

Parties and Referendums in Ireland 1937–2011

Political parties are central to democracy, but according to some arguments their capacity to discharge their functions is weakening in many countries. Moreover, the institution of the referendum is sometimes perceived to pose particular problems for political parties, impinging on their centrality in political life and on their internal cohesion. Ireland is one of Europe's heaviest users of the referendum, so in that light it may be expected that parties in Ireland are weaker than those in most other countries. Consideration of the available evidence produces a mixed picture, however, with Irish parties conforming to expected trends in some respects but not in others.

Does the Treaty Amendment on the European Stability Mechanism Require a Referendum in Ireland?

The Treaty of Lisbon entered into force on 1 December 2009. Less than two years later, however, the process of amending the constitutive treaties of the European Union as they have stood since then is already well under way. At its meeting on 24-25 March 2011, the European Council unanimously adopted a decision under Article 48(6) of the Treaty on European Union amending Article 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The decision – which enters into force only when approved by the member states in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements – provides that the following paragraph shall be added to Article 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.The Member States whose currency is the euro may establish a stability mechanism to be activated if indispensable to safeguard the stability of the euro area as a whole. The granting of any required financial assistance under the mechanism will be made subject to strict conditionality.This article examines this amendment and the question of whether its adoption requires a referendum in Ireland.

Looking Through Different Glasses at the Lisbon Treaty: The German Constitutional Court and the Czech Constitutional Court

The Treaty of Lisbon was signed on 13 December 2007 and has still to enter into legal force, although its enactment was scheduled for the end of 2008. After the long-awaited signature of the Czech President Vaclav Klaus the enactment is now scheduled for the first of December. Nearly one year later than intended. This delay is mainly due to the constitutional courts in the member states of the European Union (EU). Particularly the referendum in Ireland was an Irish Supreme Court requirement. The enactment of the Treaty of Lisbon will change the day-to-day life in Brussels extensively. Accordingly, some citizens in the member states disapproved that this decision should only be taken by their parliaments. In some countries a referendum was demanded. In others people were content with a ruling of the constitutional court regarding the constitutionality of the Treaty of Lisbon. Especially in Germany and in the Czech Republic this was the case. In both countries the German Constitutional Court (GCC) and the Czech Constitutional Court (CCC) had a similar task. Yet, their outcomes differ. Both courts judged about the compatibility of the Lisbon Treaty with ‘their’ respective national constitution from a different perspective. The CCC started with a quite positive view regarding the European integration process, unlike the GCC which was more reluctant in finding positive aspects of the European multilevel-regime. Interestingly, the initial position in the two countries, when bringing the case to the courts, varied widely. In Germany the Bundestag and the Bundesrat voted with a high majority for the German Act Approving the Treaty of Lisbon and the accompanying laws to this act, in contrast to the situation in the Czech Republic. Here, the case was first brought to court before the parliament had actually voted on the ratification issue. In the end, however, both courts unanimously decided this issue affirmatively.

The Participation of the German Länder in Formulating German EU-policy

On the 30 June 2009 the German Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht, FCC) has passed its long-awaited decision on the compatibility of the Act approving the Treaty of Lisbon and the accompanying legislation with the Basic law (Grundgesetz). The FCC's decision according to which the ratification law is compatible with the Basic law was greeted with relief by many German and European policy makers. It has removed another obstacle for the adoption of the Treaty of Lisbon in the European Union (EU), which still has to be ratified by Ireland, Poland and the Czech Republic, though. But also Germany's ratification still depends on the amendment of the accompanying “Act Extending and Strengthening the Rights of the Bundestag and the Bundesrat in European Union Matters” (“Extending Act”) which the FCC has declared incompatible with the Basic law insofar as the legislature, Bundestag and Bundesrat, have not been accorded sufficient rights of participation in European law-making and treaty amendment procedures. The FCC has therefore ruled that the Federal Republic of Germany's instrument of ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon may not be deposited as long as the constitutionally required legal elaboration of the parliamentary rights of participation has not entered into force. This puts pressure on German law-makers to amend the accompanying “Extending Act” possibly before the referendum in Ireland and before German elections in autumn 2009.

Taking the Direct Route - The Irish Supreme Court Decisions in Crotty, Coughlan and McKenna (No. 2)

The manner of conduct of Constitutional referendums in Ireland has come under particularly sharp focus since the defeat of the referendum which was intended to facilitate the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon in June 2008. The Supreme Court rulings considered in this article - Crotty v. An Taoiseach, McKenna v. An Taoiseach (No. 2) and Coughlan v. Broadcasting Complaints Commission and RTE combined with the failure of successive executives and legislatures to react to them in an adequate manner with legislation have played a significant role in the failure of Ireland to ratify the Treaty of Lisbon by the time of writing. Indeed, if the decision not to ratify the Lisbon Treaty is not ultimately reversed, it may well be that these judgments will collectively come to be regarded as the most significant examples of judicial activism in Irish legal history. Somewhat curiously, notwithstanding the very major impact which Supreme Court jurisprudence has had on the frequency and conduct of referendums on European Treaties in Ireland, the case-law examined here has until recently attracted relatively little academic attention. This article seeks to redress this lacuna.