On January 17, 1997, a seriously ill man became the first person to be granted a divorce decree in Ireland, after changes green-lighted by a referendum came into effect, amending the Constitution. Following an intense campaign by both sides, people voted by a slim majority of 50.28% to 49.72% to allow the constitutional changes to take place.
In a country deeply divided on the issue even following the referendum, the government placed heavy restrictions on divorces. Couples had to live apart for at least four of the five years before divorce proceedings are initiated, show that there was no realistic prospect of reconciliation and that adequate provisions were made for children and dependants.
The first condition, in particular, has come under much scrutiny in recent years. In a referendum on May 24, the voters will be asked whether they give consent to fundamental changes, enabling the government to reduce the period of living apart to two of the previous three years before beginning the divorce proceedings, from four of the previous five years.
“Four years is too long to live in legal and day-to-day limbo if your marriage has broken down irretrievably,” said Lisa Hughes, a campaigner who attended the launch of the campaign by the ruling Fine Gael party, last week.
The government argues that the existing rules simply raise the legal costs to couples, requiring them to apply for costly separation agreements as part of the divorce process. It also insists that it is only this aspect of the safeguards that will be changed. “The law today traps couples in irretrievably failed relationships. Rather than supporting families, the current lengthy separation period requirement can damage them... this surely cannot be acceptable in modern Ireland,” said Josepha Madigan, the Culture Minister and a former family lawyer, who has led the campaign to change the law through a private member’s Bill.
The referendum is the latest in a series of votes that is rapidly transforming the Irish society. It will take place just under a year after the country voted in favour of repealing a constitutional amendment that banned abortion. That followed a campaign in which the death of Savita Halappanavar, a young dentist originally from Karnataka, was put at the heart of the debate. In 2015, a referendum had also heralded the introduction of same sex marriages.
The votes have highlighted the rapid change taking place in Ireland’s Catholic-dominated society but have also been influenced by the use of “deliberative procedures” via national citizens, argues Jane Suiter, a professor at Dublin City University, in a paper for the London School of Economics, referring to the assemblies of randomly selected members of the public who come together to debate, hear evidence and vote on contentious issues.
Citizens’ assemblies
In 2017, a citizens’ assembly considered the issue of the Eighth Amendment on abortion, with the majority voting in favour of allowing the termination of pregnancies without restriction to be lawful. “Both referendums are notable for having their origins in these assemblies and for the extensive campaigns and widespread political and civil society involvement which accompanied them,” she noted.
“The idea is that deliberation in advance of a referendum can structurally undermine populist rhetoric, increase knowledge and provide a closer match between values and vote choice,” she wrote, pointing to research that suggested that 87% of the respondents felt that they fully understood the issues at stake. In contrast, a survey found that just 55% felt they understood the economic consequences of Brexit.
The issues at the heart of the forthcoming divorce referendum haven’t been through the rigours of a citizens’ assembly though there has already been analysis aplenty, including from Ireland’s Law Society, which has come out strongly in favour of the change.
The issue has also commanded support across political parties, with an organised opposition campaign yet to emerge. Still, with polls suggesting a sizeable level of opposition among the public (one poll by a popular talk show found that 26% plan to vote ‘no’), there is little space for complacency.
Vidya Ram is The Hindu ’s London correspondent
