Previous 7 / 15 Next

6/10/2020 Sinnott -v- The Minister for The Environment [2017] IEHC 214 (30 March 2017) identified how the United Kingdom, Poland, Austria, Malta, Spain, Germany, Australia and the United States of America had all provided for TVD voting. 39. Mr. Michael Marsh (fellow emeritus of TCD) was engaged to prepare a report for the defendants in this action. This report expressed scepticism about finding a solution to all of the plaintiff’s grievances relating to independent and secret voting. Mr. Marsh had not been informed of the Minister’s intention to introduce the 2016 Regulations prior to preparing the report or giving evidence on 20th July, 2016. 40. The upshot of the expert evidence is that there is not one solution to all of the plaintiff’s concerns. In fact, the plaintiff accepted that further research and development needs to be undertaken. The thrust of the plaintiff’s complaints is that nothing further will be done quickly or at all unless this Court intervenes in the limited way that it can in granting the reliefs now. The Constitution 41. Article 16 of the Constitution governs the election of Dáil Éireann and para. 4 provides that:“Voting shall be by secret ballot.” 42. Article 18 of the Constitution governs the Seanad and para. 5 provides that voting shall be “by secret postal ballot”. 43. Article 47 of the Constitution governs referenda for constitutional change and does not expressly provide for a secret ballot stating:“3. Every citizen who has the right to vote at an election for members of Dáil Éireann shall have the right to vote at a referendum. 4. Subject as aforesaid, the referendum shall be regulated by law.” It is indeed a well enshrined norm that a person votes by secret ballot in a referendum and the 2016 Regulations reinforced a recognition of that norm. 44. Article 28A of the Constitution concerning local government provides:“1. The State recognises the role of local government in providing a form for the democratic representation of local communities, in exercising and performing at local level powers and functions conferred by law and in promoting by its initiatives the interests of such community. 2. There shall be such directly elected local authorities as may be determined by law and their powers and functions shall, subject to the provisions of this Constitution, be so determined and shall be exercised and performed in accordance with law. 3. Elections for members of such local authorities shall be held in accordance with law not later than the end of the fifth year after the year in which they were last held. 4. Every citizen who has the right to vote at an election for members of Dáil Éireann and such other persons as may be determined by law shall have the right to vote at an election for members of such of the local authorities referred to in section 2 of this Article as shall be determined by law. 5. Casual vacancies in the membership of local authorities referred to in section 2 of this Article shall be filled in accordance with law.” 45. Regulation 30(1) of the Local Elections Regulations 1965 requires that local government elections shall be by secret ballot. Section 94(5)(j) of the Electoral Act 1992 46. On Christmas Day, 1996, the Electoral (Amendment) Act 1996 (“the 1996 Act”) was enacted and it inserted the following provision into the Electoral Act 1992 (“the 1992 Act”):www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2017/H214.html 7/15

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Sinnott v. Minister for the Environment

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether the plaintiff's inability to cast a secret ballot based on his visual impairment violated his right to vote.

Alleged Acts: The plaintiff in this case has approximately two or three percent of typical person his age. The plaintiff alleges that the government has not fully accommodated his right to vote. After the 2009 election the plaintiff discovered an additional medical issue with his eye and expects to lose the remainder of his vision. During the 2011 election the plaintiff was assisted by a clerk who read aloud his preferences both before and after completing the form. This procedure was completed again in 2011 and in 2012. In 2013, the plaintiff's polling place changed and he was no longer safely able to get to his polling station. In 2014 the plaintiff wrote the defendants expressing his concern and requesting a mechanisms to cast a private ballot for the upcoming May 2014 elections. In 2014 the plaintiff was unsure if the clerk following his instructions and cast his true preferences. In 2015 the plaintiff thought he found a solution by asking the clerk if place his fingers on different boxes. However, the plaintiff was unsure if at the time of submitting the ballot he did so with the ballot facing outwards and therefore voiding any secrecy.

Summary: The court determined that they must first look to whether a constitutional right is in asserted and correctly applied. The court here found the right to vote to be a constitutional right and adequately applied. The court then determined that if the right was applicable, the court must use the proper mechanisms to ensure that the right is vindicated. The Constitution itself requires that the ballots remain a secret to whatever extent possible.

Conclusion: The Minister did not give sufficient reasonable recognition of the duty to ensure that secret ballots were reasonably accessible. The Minister must publicly outline his plans to facilitate voting for visually impaired and blind individuals.

Legal Issue(s)

Elections as a Fundamental Right

Applicable Law(s): Elect. Act 94(5)(j) (1992) (Ire.)

Region: Europe and Eurasia

Country: Ireland

Language of Decision

English

Court: Supreme Court

Election Type: General

Date of decision: Mar 30, 2017

Geolocation

Latitude: 53.340925847415214

Longitude: -6.2028134427433885

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

Sinnott v. Minister for the Environment.pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Sinnott v. Minister for the Environment

Primary Documents

Notifications