Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Two Questions, One Answer

  • 26-05-2019 10:23am
    #1
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭


    In relation to the recent divorce referendum; two seperate questions were asked but it was only possible to give one and the same answer to both.

    Is this legal/constitutional? Has a precedent been set here?

    Now it just so happens that this time round, the questions were fairly innocuous or at least non contentious going by the result but in future referenda will it be possible for a government to shoehorn and unpopular question in with another say?

    It dosnt smell quite kosher to me.


Comments

  • #2
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    Can you clarify what you are talking about? There was only one question asked. Do you approve or not?


  • #3
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    https://www.refcom.ie/current-referendums/regulation-of-divorce/referendum-faqs/


  • #4
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    Ah right, I get you now.


  • #5
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,789 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    In relation to the recent divorce referendum; two seperate questions were asked but it was only possible to give one and the same answer to both.
    Strictly speaking, only one question was asked: do you approve of the proposal to amend the constitution?

    That amendment will have two distinct consequences. If you happen to approve of one consequence but not the other, you have a choice to make.

    Is it legal? Is it constitutional? Yes, and yes. Does it set a precedent? No.


  • #6
    28064212
    Registered Users Posts: 10,454 ✭✭✭✭28064212


    Has a precedent been set? No, lots of the amendments made multiple changes. Take a look at the 33rd. It would be entirely legal and constitutional to draft a new constitution from scratch that was totally different to the current one, and have a single referendum for it

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, and dark mode). Now available through the extension stores

    Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/boardsie-enhancement-suite/

    Chrome/Edge/Opera: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/boardsie-enhancement-suit/bbgnmnfagihoohjkofdnofcfmkpdmmce



  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,865 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    I wondered about this too, but didn't worry too much about it regarding the issues on the ballot paper.

    I am sure there would be separate questions for other issues. Or just one at a time per referendum.

    The reality is, Foreign Divorces are already recognised here, but in certain cases they are not. It is just cleaning things up. If a divorce is legal in another jurisdiction it should be recognised here too.


  • #8
    expectationlost
    Registered Users Posts: 11,749 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    In relation to the recent divorce referendum; two seperate questions were asked but it was only possible to give one and the same answer to both.

    Is this legal/constitutional? Has a precedent been set here?

    Now it just so happens that this time round, the questions were fairly innocuous or at least non contentious going by the result but in future referenda will it be possible for a government to shoehorn and unpopular question in with another say?

    It dosnt smell quite kosher to me.
    you are voting whether you approve of this one bill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty-eighth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_Bill_2016


Advertisement