In September 2023 Michael Healy Rae was walking on Kildare Street when he encountered a small group of protesters. They were upset about immigration, proposed hate speech law and trans rights – an issue Healy-Rae had previously said shouldn’t be discussed with children, claiming, “When a child is born, they are a boy or a girl and that is it”. They assaulted the Kerry TD in an incident described as “an attack on democracy”. Last month a young man who took part in the fracas avoided a prison sentence for “intimidating” Healy-Rae. Expressing remorse, Dean Hickson told judge Paula Murphy he’ll never attend another protest. Liberal democracy salvaged.
We hear the phrase attack on democracy in reference to moments like just described – when the biggest landlord in Dáil Éireann is obstructed from pulling some levers. It has been notably absent to describe a greater threat to democratic accountability after the general election last year. Healy-Rae is a player in a fight over speaking rights, insisting he and others who have agreed to support Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael exist in the liminal space between government and opposition.
Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael have agreed to give the Regional Independent Group the trappings of government and the benefits of opposition. In what is clearly an arrangement with Michael Lowry – a convicted criminal whose role in the award of a telecommunications contract to Denis O’Brien was "disgraceful and insidious", according to the Moriarty Tribunal – the coalition is trying to suppress criticism and limit the scrutiny to which its decisions would typically be subject.
When opposition TDs protested the decision on speaking rights by delaying the selection of a taoiseach in January, Micheál Martin condemned their actions as a "subversion of the Irish constitution.” He said the obligation of the Dáil to elect a taoiseach is more important than issues about speaking rights.
Note the attempt to elevate the dispute to a legal matter and therefore beyond reproach. Real attacks on democracy rarely come in the form of an angry mob. They arrive disguised in procedural justifications, technocratic language, and invocations of the law, brought by the likes of Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael.
The experts have spoken
It is not just the speaking rights dispute we’re talking about – government seeks to naturalise every issue of significance. The political establishment didn’t want a citizens’ assembly on defence because the public overwhelmingly favours neutrality. Instead it opted for a “consultative forum” filled with cherry-picked Nato, Nato-aligned and Nato-friendly speakers. No need to speak to the general population – we’ve got the experts here instead. The result was a report compiled by professor Dame Louise Richardson, which has informed a number of “reforms” implemented by government.
At the time of writing Fianna Fail and Fine Gael are forwarding measures to remove the triple lock, a mechanism that prevents the state sending more than 12 Irish soldiers on peacekeeping missions without government, Dáil and UN approval. In 2013 Micheál Martin said the triple lock was "the core" of Irish neutrality. He now says the opposite. He likely believes neither claim.
Very clear legal advice. Kind of
There’s little more cynical than government’s repeated lies about advice it has received from the attorney general. In the run-up to the two referenda on family and care last year, Roderic O'Gorman said in an interview with the Irish Independent that family, immigration and social welfare laws would not be affected by the proposed amendments. "The very clear legal advice we've received throughout from the attorney general is that these items (family, immigration and social welfare laws) will not be impacted by what we're proposing to amend in the constitution," he said.
But this was not the case. Rossa Fanning advised that "policymakers will be required to offer greater weight to the rights of the non-marital family, including in child care, immigration and social welfare" and warned that "issues relating to the application of Article 41 to non-marital families will be more heavily litigated than at present," mentioning immigration and surrogacy as areas likely to be affected.
O'Gorman lied about the advice because it allowed him to avoid democratic opposition – using Fanning’s authority as a shield against debate rather than engaging those advocating a No vote.
The Occupied Territories Bill has received similar treatment. Micheál Martin said the attorney general advised that the legislation is incompatible with constitutional and EU law. In January he said "virtually every section" needed amendment. The Ditch recently reported that Martin exaggerated these obstacles. And he did so because government likely won’t pass the bill for other reasons – it’s terrified of retaliation from the US.
This is the true function of the attorney general for Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael: to provide a veneer of legal inevitability for political decisions.
Government wants the public to believe that its decisions are necessary – not political choices. This is why the taoiseach constantly dismisses criticism as "political." Whether it's Sinn Féin boycotting the annual St Patrick’s Day event at the White House or The Ditch reporting on the behaviour of ministers of state – opposition to government's actions are by definition illegitimate.
Unless we recognise the ongoing attacks on democracy for what they are, Ireland will be doomed to a system of political theatrics that functions to obscure predetermined choices governed by economics and geopolitical pressure rather than public consensus. Actual democracy requires more than formalities. It demands the ability to meaningfully oppose government decisions.
