The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a businessman’s appeal over the rejection of his challenge to the process for nominating candidates in the presidential election.
Niall Byrne sought a Supreme Court appeal after the High Court dismissed his claim that Fine Gael leader Simon Harris’s direction to the party’s local authority members against nominating Independent candidates in the election was unconstitutional.
In a recently published determination agreeing to hear the appeal, a panel of three Supreme Court judges – Ms Justice Elizabeth Dunne, Mr Justice Peter Charleton and Mr Justice Maurice Collins – said the issue in the appeal relates only to the nomination process and to the entitlement of party leaders, in general, to direct members of local authorities to support a particular candidate to the exclusion of exercising an independent choice.
The issue cannot affect the validity of the election of President Catherine Connolly, they said.
READ MORE
The respondents to the appeal are Tánaiste and Fine Gael leader Simon Harris, the Minister for Housing, the Attorney General and Ireland.
Mr Byrne sought a ‘leapfrog’ appeal, that is, one directly to the Supreme Court rather than the Court of Appeal, against the High Court’s rejection last October of his challenge.
Mr Byrne announced on September 5th last he intended to seek nomination as an independent candidate for the Presidential election. Within 24 hours, he claimed the Fine Gael leader directed local councils to block or discourage the nomination of Independent candidates.
In a High Court challenge taken on October 8th, he claimed Mr Harris’ direction was an unconstitutional interference and that the nomination process for the presidency was repugnant to the Constitution.
The High Court’s Mr Justice Brian Cregan ruled on October 21st that the direction was a political directive and thus not justiciable by the courts.
He ruled as “unstateable” Mr Byrne’s claim the nomination process in Article 12.4 of the Constitution conflicted with other constitutional provisions establishing the Irish people’s right to choose their own government.
Article 12.4 provides any citizen of Ireland aged 35 and over can run for president. It states persons who are neither a serving nor former president must be nominated either by at least 20 members of the Oireachtas or by four local councils. An Oireachtas member or local authority cannot formally nominate more than one candidate.
Mr Justice Cregan said any reform of the nomination process was in the political realm and, if there was reform, that would ultimately be a matter for the people in a referendum.
The issue in the Supreme Court appeal, to be heard on a date yet to be fixed, is whether a party leader’s direction breached constitutional principles concerning the election of the president or was an impermissible interference in the process.
While the courts have shown restraint in reviewing internal political procedures, a different issue may arise when individual rights, such as a candidate’s right to stand for election, or voters’ rights, are said to be directly affected, the Supreme Court panel said.
Leave to appeal was granted on whether a direction such as that given by the Fine Gael leader to Fine Gael councillors to support the party’s presidential candidate, and not to support the nomination of any other candidate, is justiciable by the courts.
If the court decides it is justiciable, it will then consider if such a direction amounts to an impermissible interference with the nomination process as provided for in Article 12.
