Previous 15 / 15 Next

6/10/2020 Sinnott -v- The Minister for The Environment [2017] IEHC 214 (30 March 2017) BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2017/H214.html Sinnott -v- The Minister for The Environment [2017] IEHC ~ (30 March 2017) www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2017/H214.html 15/15

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