600 / 736
European Convention of Human Rights not to
derogate from its oblightions under the Convention
save "in time of war or other public emergency
threatening the life of the nation."
The Council also stressed that many member
States of the Council of Europe had incorporated
the Convention
into
their domestic
law, but
Ireland had held off from doing so.
(Irish Independent,
llth December, 1970.)
WRITING NUMBER ON BALLOT IS
REPUGNANT TO CONSTITUTION
In a reserved judgment delivered in the High
Court yesterday, Mr. lustice Pringle held that
certain provisions of the Electoral Acts were re
pugnant to the Constitution.
He was giving judgment in an action brought
by Niall McMahon, a
commercial
artist, of
Brookfield, Donnybrook, Dublin,
against
the
Attorney-General.
Mr. McMahon sought a declaration that some
provisions of the Electoral Acts were contrary to
the provisions of Article 16 of the Constitution.
He claimed that the name of the person or persons
for whom an elector had voted or attempted to
vote could be ascertained after the election. The
Attorney-General, in his defence, denied that the
matters complained of were repugnant to the Con
stitution.
Mr. lustice Pringle said that the particular part
of Article 16 to which Mr. McMahon contended
that the provisions referred to were repugnant
was the part which said "and the voting shall
be by secret ballot."
The Attorney-General, while conceding that the
effect of the provisions referred to was that in
certain specified circumstances
the manner in
which a person had voted could be ascertained,
contended
that
the ballot was a secret ballot
within the meaning of those words in the Con
stitution and that none of the provisions of the
Acts were repugnant.
Mr.
lustice Pringle
found
that it was not
necessary in order to give effect to all the pro
visions of Article 16 that provision should be made
enabling the ballot paper of a voter to be iden
tified at any time or in any circumstances after
he had voted or attempted to vote by putting his
ballot paper into the ballot box.
The words "secret ballot" in Article 16 of the
Constitution meant a ballot in which there was
complete and inviolable secrecy.
He found that the following provisions of the
Electoral Act, 1923 and of the Electoral Act, 1963
were inconsistent with and contrary to Article 16
of the Constitution and were repugnant to it and
invalid:
So much of Rule 22 of he Rules for the Conduct
of Dail Elections contained in Part 1 of the Fifth
Schedule to the Electoral Act, 1923, as provides
that the number on the register of electors of
each elector to whom a ballot paper is delivered
shall be marked on the counterfoil of such ballot
paper.
So much of Rule 41 as provides that the coun
terfoil of a ballot paper delivered to an elector
is to have his number on the Register of Electors
marked on it.
Also, so much of the form of counterfoil of a
ballot paper set out in Part 2 of the Second
Schedule to the Electoral Act, 1963 (numbered
from 5A) as provides for the insertion thereof of
the voter's number on the Register of Electors.
Mr. Justice Pringle said it seemed to him that,
having regard to those conclusions, it was not
necessary to declare any other provisions of the
Statutes
to be unconstitutional, but he would
hear counsel as to this and as to the form of the
order. He fixed next Thursday for the argument.
Mr. Hugh J. O'Flaherty (for the Attorney-
General) said he would be anxious that the formal
order be available as soon as possible.
His
instructions were that an appeal to the Supreme
Court should be brought with the greatest speed.
INTERNMENT WITHOUT TRIAL
The Council of the Incorporated Law Society on
10th December,
1970
passed
the
following
Resolution: —
"That the Council of the Incorporated Law
Society of Ireland abhor internment without
trial except when grave reasons are disclosed
to the nation indicating that the safety of
the State is threatened."
GOVERNMENT URGED TO USE
NORMAL LAW INSTEAD OF
INTERNMENT
The Irish Association of Civil Liberty, in a
statement last night on the possible reintroduction
of
interment without trial under the Offences
Against the State Acts, said that only the gravest
threat to the safety of the nation could justify such
a course.
142