Information (Termination of Pregnancies) Bill, 1995
Jurisdiction | Ireland |
Court | Supreme Court |
Judge | HamiltonC.J. |
Judgment Date | 12 May 1995 |
Neutral Citation | [1995] IESC 9 |
Docket Number | [S.C. No. 87 of 1995] |
Date | 12 May 1995 |
[1995] IESC 9
THE SUPREME COURT
HAMILTON C.J.
O'FLAHERTY J.
EGAN J.
BLAYNEY J.
DENHAM J.
Citations:
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S6
CONSTITUTION ART 26.2.1
INDECENT ADVERTISEMENTS ACT 1889
CENSORSHIP OF PUBLICATIONS ACTS 1929 – 1967
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION ACT 1992
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S3
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S4
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S5
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S1(i)
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S7
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S8
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S3(1)(a)
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S3(1)(a) PARA (i)
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S3(1)(a) PARA (ii)
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S10
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S9
AG V OPEN DOOR COUNSELLING LTD 1988 IR 593
CRIMINAL LAW (JURISDICTION) BILL 1975, IN RE 1977 IR 129
ELECTORAL (AMDT) BILL 1983, IN RE 1984 IR 273
ADOPTION (NO 2) BILL 1987, IN RE 1989 IR 660
EAST DONEGAL CO-OPERATIVE LIVESTOCK MARTS LTD V AG 1970 IR 317
ADOPTION (NO 2) BILL 1987, IN RE 1989 IR 661
CONSTITUTION ART 5
CONSTITUTION ART 6
CONSTITUTION ART 40.3
EIGHTH AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION ACT 1982
THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION ACT 1992
CONSTITUTION ART 41.1
CONSTITUTION ART 41.2
G V BORD UCHTALA 1980 IR 32
MCGEE V AG 1974 IR 284
NORRIS V AG 1984 IR 36
SPUC, AG V OPEN DOOR COUNSELLING LTD 1988 IR 593
CONSTITUTION ART 40.6.1
SPUC V GROGAN 1989 IR 753
AG V X 1992 1 IR 1
TREATY OF ROME ART 60
SPUC V GROGAN 1991 ECR 4685
BYRNE V IRELAND 1972 IR 241
CONSTITUTION ART 15.1.1
CONSTITUTION ART 26.1
CONSTITUTION ART 26.3.1
CONSTITUTION ART 28.2
CONSTITUTION ART 34.1
CONSTITUTION ART 35.2
CONSTITUTION ART 40
CONSTITUTION ART 41
CONSTITUTION ART 42
CONSTITUTION ART 43
CONSTITUTION ART 44
RYAN V AG 1965 IR 312
HEALY, STATE V DONOGHUE 1976 IR 326
TUOHY V COURTNEY 1994 2 ILRM 503
CONSTITUTION ART 26
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S8(1)
REGULATION OF INFORMATION (SERVICES OUTSIDE THE STATE FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995 S8(2)
MATRIMONIAL HOME BILL 1993, IN RE 1994 1 IR 305
CONSTITUTION ART 40.3.3
BUCKLEY V AG 1950 IR 67
CONSTITUTION ART 42.1
CONSTITUTION ART 46
CONSTITUTION ART 15.4
CONSTITUTION ART 40.3.1
CONSTITUTION ART 40.3.2
CONSTITUTION ART 15.2.1
CONSTITUTION ART 40.3.3
Synopsis:
CONSTITUTION
Legislation
Bill - Repugnancy - Question - President - Powers - Reference of Bill to Supreme Court - Control of information concerning ser vices available abroad - Termination of pregnancies abroad - Control of dissemination of relevant information - Advocation and promotion of termination of pregnancy prohibited - Relevance of natural law in construing articles of the Constitution - Presumption that implementation of statute was intended to accord with constitutional justice - Inadequacy of penalty for breach of statute not a ground for repugnancy of enactment - Lacuna in Bill immaterial - Bill not repugnant to Constitution - Constitution of Ireland, 1937, Articles 5, 15, 26, 40, 47 - (87/95 - Supreme Court - 12/5/95) - [1995] 1 IR 1 - [1995] 2 ILRM 81
|Regulation of Information (Services outside the State for
Termination of Pregnancies) Bill, 1995|
CRIMINAL LAW
Offence
Penalty - Adequacy - Oireachtas - Function - Whether Bill repugnant to Constitution - Inadequacy of penalty not a ground for finding of repugnancy - (87/95 - Supreme Court - 12/5/95)1995 1 IR 1
|Regulation of Information (Services outside the State for Termination of Pregnancies) Bill, 1995|
NATURAL LAW
Relevance
Constitution - Provisions - Interpretation - State - Fundamental law - Provisions not subordinate to natural law - (87/95 - Supreme Court - 12/5/95) - [1995] 1 IR 1 - [1995] 2 ILRM 81
|Regulation of Information (Services outside the State for Termination of Pregnancies) Bill, 1995|
STATUTORY INTERPRETATION
Enactment
Terms - Implementation - Manner - Presumption - Compliance with constitutional justice - Adoption of fair procedures - Duties of pregnancy counsellor - (87/95 - Supreme Court - 12/5/95)1995 1 IR 1
|Regulation of Information (Services outside the State for Termination of Pregnancies) Bill, 1995|
WORDS AND PHRASES
"Natural justice"
Relevance - Constitution - Provisions - Interpretation - Provisions not subordinate to natural law - (87/95 - Supreme Court - 12/5/95) - [1995] 1 IR 1 - [1995] 2 ILRM 81
|Regulation of Information (Services outside the State for Termination of Pregnancies) Bill, 1995|
The Decision of the Court pronounced by HamiltonC.J.on the 12th day of May 1995
This is the decision of the Supreme Court on the reference to it by the President of the Regulation of Information (Services Outside the State for Termination of Pregnancies) Bill, 1995, (hereinafter referred to as the Bill) pronounced pursuant to Article 26.2.1 of theConstitution.
By order given under her hand and seal on the 18th day of March 1995 the President, Mary Robinson, in pursuance of the provisions of Article 26 of the Constitution after consultation with the Council ofState referred the Bill to the Supreme Court for a decision on the question as to whether the Bill or any provision or provisions thereof is or are repugnant to the Constitution or to any provisionthereof.
The long title of the Bill states that it is:-
"An act to prescribe the conditions subject to which certain information relating to services lawfully available outside the State for the termination of pregnancies and to persons who provide such services may be given to individual women or the general public, to amend the Indecent Advertisements Act, 1889 and the Censorship of Publications Acts, 1929to 1967and to provide for related matters."
Having regard to the nature of the Bill and to the possibility of the Challenge to its constitutionality being based on diametrically opposed viewpoints, namely, those based on or with particular reference to the right to life of the unborn and those based on or with particular reference to the right to life of the mother, and the Court's duty in testing the provisions thereof to examine it in as wide amanner as possible, the Court considered it desirable to assign two teams of counsel and solicitors to argue against the constitutionality of the Bill, one set of arguments to be based on the right to life of the unborn and one set on the right to life of the mother, neither team however to be limited in the making of any arguments against the consitutionality of the Bill or any provision thereof.
Prior to the oral hearing, counsel assigned by the Court in pursuance of Article 26 of the Constitution presented in writing heads of the argument intended to be made by them and submissions of law in support of such argument. These were replied to in writing by and on behalf of the Attorney General together with submissions of law on hisbehalf.
The oral hearing then took place before the Court on the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th of April 1995.
At this stage it is desirable to emphasise thatboth the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution and the Bill are concerned solely with the freedom to obtain or make available information. They do not purport to make lawful any act directly affecting the life of the unborn which would not have been lawful prior to the passing of the Fourteenth Amendment. They are exclusively concerned with the question of information and do not deal with the use which may be made of the information obtained. It does not address circumstances in which abortion may be legal either in this jurisdiction or outside the State.
The main provisions of the Bill may be summarised as follows:-
(1) The Bill applies to information, likely to be required by a woman for the purpose of availing herself of services provided outside the State for the termination of pregnancies being information which relates to such services and to the persons who provide them - such information being defined in the Bill as Act information.
(2) Section 3 of the Bill provides that it shall not be unlawful to publish or procure the publication of, in any of the ways set out below, Act information relating to services which are lawfully available in a particular place or to persons providing them in a particular place
(i) if the information relates only to services which are lawfully available in that place, and to persons, who, in providing them are acting lawfully in that place;
(ii) the information and the method and manner of its publication are in compliance with the laws of that place;
(iii) the information is truthful and objective; and
(iv) does not advocate or promote and is not accompanied by any advocacy or promotion of the termination of pregnancy.
The ways referred to are:-
(a)...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Prendergast v Higher Education Authority
...Bill 1999 [2000] 2 I.R. 321,MacMathúna v. Attorney General [1995] 1 I.R. 484 and Information (Termination of Pregnancies) Bill, 1995 [1995] 1 I.R. 1 followed. 6. That the provision of medical education was so expensive that it could not be considered anti-competitive of the government to se......
-
A and B v Eastern Health Board
...of the Supreme Court in the Article 26 Reference relating to the Information (Termination of Pregnancies) Bill.1995. 1995, reported in 1995 1 I.R. 1 and as expressed in the judgment of Hamilton C.J. at p.47. The Chief Justice says thefollowing:- "As already stated, the effect of the decisi......
-
Prendergast v Higher Education Authority and Others
...AG 1995 1 IR 484 1995 1 ILRM 69 ART 26 OF THE CONSTITUTION & THE REGULATION OF INFORMATION (TERMINATION OF PREGNANCIES) BILL 1995, IN RE 1995 1 IR 1 HIGHER EDUCATION AUTHORITY ACT 1971 S2 OIREACHTAS JOINT COMMITTEE ON HEALTH & CHILDREN SECOND REPORT: RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES IN MEDICAL TRAIN......
-
S.M. v Ireland (No 2)
...Re Article 26 of the Constitution and the Regulation of Information (Services Outside the State for Termination of Pregnancy) Bill, 1995 [1995] 1 I.R. 1 (at p. 53): "The question of the determination of the appropriate penalty for the commission of an offence created by statute is a matter......
-
The Constitutional Protection of Children in Ireland ? Assessing the Need for Reform and the Available Alternatives
...be noted that in Re Article 26 and the Regulation of Information (Services outside the State for Termination of Pregnancies) Bill 1995 [1995] 1 IR 1 the Supreme Court stated that natural law could not invalidate a constitutional amendment not could it invalidate an explicit constitutional p......
-
Our Herculean Judiciary?: Interpretivism and the Unenumerated Rights Doctrine
...the time. 55 Ronald Dworkin, ‘Hard Cases’ (1975) 88 Harvard Law Review 1057, 1078. 56 [1974] IR 284, 319 (SC). 57 Kavanagh (n 4) 71. 58 [1995] 1 IR 1 (SC). [2020] Irish Judicial Studies Journal Vol 4(1) 58 IRISH JUDICIAL STUDIES JOURNAL 58 Assuming that the termination of a pregnancy was co......
-
Ireland's Magdalene laundries and the State's failure to protect
...I.R. 294 138 In Re Article 26 and the Regulation of Information (Services outside the State for Termination of Pregnancies) Bill, 1995 [1995] 1 I.R. 1 139 Judgment of Henchy J in Mc Gee v Attorney General , supra note 136 140 Judgment of Walsh J in McGee v Attorney General , supra note 136 ......
-
The C Case
...at rP.165-176. Re Article 26 and the Regulation of Information (Services outside the State for the Termination of Pregnancies) Bill 1995 [1995] 2 ILRM 81, herein referred to as the Information Reference. However, The Information Reference must be treated with caution if it is to used as an ......