The Supreme Court allowed Tomás Heneghan’s appeal and ruled that the Oireachtas has a constitutional obligation to revise and extend the franchise for the Seanad’s university seats. It declared key provisions of the Seanad Electoral (Universities Members) Act 1937 unconstitutional, but suspended that declaration initially until 31 July 2023, pending a further order after the parties make submissions on the suspension period.
Heneghan, a University of Limerick graduate, argued that Article 18.4.2° of the Constitution, inserted by the 1979 Seventh Amendment, required the Oireachtas to extend the university franchise beyond the University of Dublin and the National University of Ireland. The High Court dismissed his claim in 2021. The Supreme Court granted him leave to appeal directly.
In a concurring judgment, Mr Justice Gerard Hogan said the amendment’s wording was unclear, but its context showed that voters intended the franchise to be extended to other higher education institutions. He concluded that the Oireachtas had to act within a reasonable time after the amendment, and that this period had long expired. The court said the obligation to revise the constituencies remains and must now be discharged within a reasonable period.
The ruling does not invalidate past university Seanad elections. Hogan said their results since 1979 are beyond legal challenge. The suspension also means the 1937 Act remains effective until 31 July 2023, and university Seanad general elections or by-elections could validly be held under it up to and including that date.
The judgment explained that immediate effect could disrupt the democratic process, including the ability to hold a Seanad general election within the constitutional timetable after a Dáil dissolution. It also noted the practical work needed to extend the franchise, including creating new electoral registers.
The judgment excerpt gives Hogan’s concurring reasons and conclusions. It identifies Murray J.’s judgment as setting out the facts and salient issues, but does not include that judgment’s full account or the court’s further order after the parties’ submissions.