Sir, - As a Derryman, I would reject any constitutional tinkering which leaves me regarded as any less Irish than a Kerryman.
However, it has to be admitted that Bunreacht na hEireann was never intended to be set in stone forever and that certain provisions relating to the North are actually undemocratic. Article 1, for instance, asserts that "The Irish nation hereby affirms .. ." But the Irish nation does no such thing, for the nation was not consulted. Only the 26-county electorate passed judgment on Bunreacht na hEireann - and the 26 counties are not the Irish nation.
Likewise, Article 3 claims the "right of the Parliament and Government established by this Constitution to exercise jurisdiction over the whole of that [national] territory". This is blatantly undemocratic because the parliament and government so established have no six-county mandate. No attempt was ever made, at the time of the enactment of Bunreacht na hEireann or since, to provide for any six-county franchise or representation in the "national parliament".
I regard Article 2, which defines the so-called national territory, as more of a geography lesson than a political doctrine. However, as unionists seem deliberately incapable of distinguishing between "national" and `'nationalist", perhaps refinement is necessary. Nonetheless, I repeat that no adjustments can be contemplated which make the Bogside officially less Irish then the Burren. - Yours, etc.,
Nigel Cooke
Wheatfield Court, Dublin 22.