asked the Taoiseach if the Government have under review the introduction of amending legislation to provide for a system of civil divorce for persons whose marriages have irretrievably broken down.

10.

asked the Taoiseach if any further constitutional referenda are proposed during the present Dáil term.

With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 and 10 together.

The possibility of amendment of the Constitution in relation to bail is under consideration. The Government have no proposals for constitutional referenda during the present Dáil session.

Does the Taoiseach anticipate that the decision to have a constitutional referendum on bail will be made in the near future?

It is a difficult question. I have been pressing the responsible people to come up with whatever proposal is to be made, if necessary by referendum, at the earliest possible moment. I am informed that it is a very complicated legal question but I am pressing those responsible for finding a solution.

(Cavan-Monaghan): As there appears to be some doubt as to whether a referendum is necessary or as to whether it can be done by legislation——

The Taoiseach answered that question.

(Cavan-Monaghan):——would the Taoiseach not think it safer to adopt the constitutional method if there is any doubt?

If it comes to that I feel it might be adopted.

Deputy B. Desmond put his name to one of these questions.

In relation to civil divorce, how much longer do the Government propose to wait before an Irish citizen brings them before the European Court of Human Rights on our failure to introduce statutory recognition of the situation where certain marriages terminate? Is the Taoiseach aware that there is a considerable body of legal opinion that notwithstanding the constitutional provision Ireland in certain circumstances may yet again be dragged before the European Court of Human Rights because under Article 8 we have failed to introduce necessary legislation and that once again we will be denounced by the European Court, to our intense embarrassment?

As the Deputy is aware, the Attorney General on my instructions referred the matter of nullity of marriages to the Law Reform Commission. It has also been suggested to the commission that other aspects of the field of matrimonial causes and proceedings should be considered, namely the degrees of relationship and the law relating to the extent which jurisdiction here and abroad might be compatible. As a first measure the commission decided to proceed on examining any change in the law of nullity and issued a report or a statement which invited comment from interested bodies. They apparently have not completed that process or at least they are still considering replies that they got from interested bodies.

Notwithstanding the prospect that there may be an easement in relation to nullity, such is the structure particularly of Article 8 of the Convention of Human Rights that in relation to divorce this country may be found in breach of it in certain circumstances in the event of a citizen taking his case to the Court of Human Rights. In that context, has the Taoiseach asked the Law Reform Commission at least to include within their ambit an examination of the general question of divorce before we find ourselves looking ridiculous again in the world?

I would prefer to see them doing the first job I gave them as quickly as possible.

Is the Taoiseach satisfied that changes in the law of nullity of which he has spoken, which would bring the civil law more closely into line with the practice of the Roman Catholic Church for example, would in fact be constitutional in the civil law under our present Constitution?

There have been decrees of nullity by the Catholic Church on an increasing scale in recent years. So far, I have not heard any challenge as to their constitutionality.

The Taoiseach has misunderstood the question and is talking about changing the civil law on nullity. If, for example, the Taoiseach were to change the law in a way that would bring it into approximate conformity with the Catholic Church, is he satisfied that that could be done under the Constitution, or is it the case that to try to equate the civil and Church law in this matter would in itself be a breach of the Constitution under the terms of the civil law?

It would be a bold man who could say that he is satisfied that anything does not conflict with the Irish Constitution.

It is a great epitaph for de Valera.

Not because of Eamon de Valera but because of people who have long survived him.

Question No. 11.

(Cavan-Monaghan): Is the Taoiseach now attacking the Supreme Court in a veiled sort of way?

In view of the fact that certain Protestant Churches do not have the service of nullity, in what way does the Taoiseach's reply meet that situation?

I am not sure Deputy——

There are Protestant Churches——

I am calling Question No. 11.

——I have to await the outcome of the Law Reform Commission's deliberation before I can answer any further questions. I cannot answer hypothetical questions on a serious matter.

There is nothing hypothetical about that; it is a fact.

Question No. 11.