The Court of Appeal has dismissed Brian Mohan’s appeal over his attempt to challenge the constitutionality of a law that reduces State funding for qualifying political parties that fail to meet candidate gender quotas. The court ruled that his membership of Fianna Fáil and his exclusion from a constituency candidate selection process did not give him standing to bring the challenge. It did not decide the law’s constitutionality.
The case concerned section 17(4B) of the Electoral Act 1997, inserted by the Electoral (Amendment) (Political Funding) Act 2012. It provides for a 50% reduction in certain State payments unless a party meets specified proportions of women and men candidates. The first threshold was 30% of each; the provision also set out a later 40% threshold.
Mohan was chair of Fianna Fáil’s Dublin Central Comhairle Dáil Ceanntair at the relevant time. In 2015, he was nominated for selection as a candidate for the constituency. The party’s general secretary told him that the National Constituencies Committee had directed that one candidate be selected at the convention and that the candidate must be a woman. Two women and Mohan were nominated; one woman was selected. Mohan did not challenge the party’s decision. He instead argued that the legislation was unconstitutional.
The High Court dismissed his claim at an initial stage because it found he lacked standing, without ruling on the constitutional question. It concluded that he had not shown a sufficient link between the law and the party’s decision to exclude him from consideration. It also found he had not established that a 50% funding reduction would make it impossible or significantly difficult for Fianna Fáil to function, or that the law required the party to choose the approach it took. The judgment said evidence identified other ways the party could meet the quota. Mohan did not challenge those factual findings in his appeal.
On appeal, Mohan argued that the funding sanction affected party members by constraining candidate selection and their ability to argue against quotas. The court accepted that the measure was intended to influence candidate selection, but said members could campaign within the party to change its policy or seek repeal or amendment of the law. It held that party membership alone did not confer standing to challenge the measure.
The court described Mohan’s claim as derivative of the party’s interests. It noted that Fianna Fáil had supported the measure and that the party itself had not challenged it. The appeal court concluded that the party’s selection decision, rather than a requirement imposed by the legislation, was the basis of Mohan’s complaint. It dismissed the appeal, leaving the constitutional validity of the provision undecided.