A Letter to Ireland, ''...A living Constitution requires a ‘living’ President, who is responsive and proactive in nurturing our legal evolution. This duty is pivotal in the Constitution, where on one hand the President must scrutinise every Bill before it is signed into law, and refer it to the Supreme Court if it appears doubtful. On the other hand, the President is also vested with the duty to ‘promulgate’ your laws, or put the law into effect by formal declaration. Reference to the Supreme Court has only happened three times in the history of the State, and never during the current Presidency. Yet, many laws have reached the courts after being passed, and were found to be unconstitutional, at great cost to the victims of these unjust laws....'' Letter in Full

From the Newswire: Oh what a lovely Democracy - Labour, Greens (not definite yet) Sinn Fein, FG and RTE (by the just about plausibly deniable sin of omission) all lining up behind Bertie's Mary as the first real chance of a national debate and election where tweedle-dum tweedle-dee civil war political lines are consigned to the past is flushed down the toilet by a cowardly set of self regarding opposition parties putting dreams of power tomorrow ahead of the battle of political ideas today and ahead of the constitutional right of citizens to vote for their President. Is rendering those wishing to participate in a supposed democratic system invisible what a national broadcaster is for? Wasn't that how it worked in Russia and how it works in North Korea?

The Labour press office line is that the Labour Party opinion was and is that once Eamonn Ryan pulled out - the process was closed bar the shouting. No whip in operation but an expectation of closed ranks on this from the Press Officer I spoke to. Lovely - It seems that the Labour Party are only too happy to close the process on behalf of the Country. They know the arithmetic and they should and deserve to take the lions share of the blame for a cynical suspension of democratic processes.
Full Story: A Riddle: Is An Opposition Really An Opposition If It Conspires With Government To Cancel an Election?

INDYMEDIA IRELAND INTERVIEW WITH VINCENT SALAFIA

Indymedia.ie: It has been said by Joe Higgins TD amongst others that the Irish Presidency should be abolished - would you agree or does it serve or can it serve a purpose?

Vincent Salafia: Absolutely not. However, I would say that the presidency as currently exercised needs to be radically changed. It is a core constitutional office, rather than window dressing for the State. The scrutiny and promulgation of legislation, and consideration of whether to refer to the Supreme Court, is a vitally important check and balance.

Indymedia.ie: Why did you take the sudden decision to run for President?

Salafia: It wasn’t a sudden decision in the sense that I had been considering it for some weeks before I went public. In fact, I was in touch with the Green Party before Eamon made his move and decided not to oppose him. When he dramatically pulled out I decided to take the plunge.

Indymedia.ie: What do you say to accusations that this is purely a publicity stunt?

Salafia: Campaigning for any office involves publicity. In fact, it lies at the core of any election campaign. I see this race as a logical continuation of the path already chosen. Furthermore, I would not have entered the race if I did not feel it is one I can credibly participate in and potentially win.

Indymedia Interview with Vincent Salafia Continues At The Feature Continued Link below

"Even before we set up the peace camp at Shannon we suspected that the US Government would use Shannon airport to transport its captives to Guantanamo Bay.

After a lot of digging, and some luck, we now have a lot more than suspicion, and YOU have to help us to hold the Irish govt to account for this. A watered down version of this appeared on page six of the Sunday Business Post today... I was expecting a bit more bite.. so here's a bit more of what's being hidden."

In the phony war on terror, thousands of people have been taken prisoner and tortured with no evidence, charges or trial. The arrests make good PR for Bush, the admissions of error are 'less newsworthy'....

Endangering human health and causing environmental harm is not what any government wants on its CV. But that is exactly what the Irish Government has been doing in the opinion of the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice. Government press people are trying to kill the story. The Government press response today (as carried in the Irish Times today) claiming that this was ancient history and that things are different now does not stand up. Already further legal action is threatened by the Commission in relation to a proposal to put a superdump next to a candidate Special Area of Conservation in Waterford. The Government tried to suppress the Commission's warning letter to it (known as a 'Reasoned Opinion'). Happily the letter came into the public domain despite that effort.

The Government of Ireland was slammed for ‘persistent widespread and serious’ failure to comply with EU waste law in the European Court Thursday (Sept. 23). Advocate-General Geelhoed told the Court that as a result of this failure the government has endangered human health and caused environmental harm. In a formal opinion delivered to the Court in Case C-494/01Commission v Ireland the Advocate-General recommends that the Court should declare Ireland to be in breach of no fewer than four separate Articles of the Waste Directive and also in breach of Article 10 of the EC Treaty.

The Advocate-General’s opinion is not binding but is normally followed by the Court. Because of the significance of the issues at stake in the case, both parties’ arguments were heard by the Court’s Grand Chamber (full panel) in July. The EU Commission brought the case to the Court following complaints about breaches of EU waste law at twelve separate locations throughout the country, including Dublin, Cork, Waterford, Wexford, Limerick, Carlow, Laois and Louth.

Government lawyers had claimed that these were only 'isolated incidents' and that there was no evidence of 'actual environmental harm'. The Advocate General flatly rejected these claims and in an unusually strongly worded opinion said that there were sufficient grounds for establishing that Ireland had infringed the Waste Directive in a ‘general and structural manner’ - in effect institutionalised lawbreaking. The government has, he says, infringed its obligations because, among other reasons, it has failed to ‘prevent the abandonment, dumping and uncontrolled disposal of waste, thereby endangering human health and causing environmental harm’.

This is the first time any EU Member State has been criticised for breaching EU health and environment law in a ‘general and structural manner’. The Advocate General’s opinion is likely to prove devastating to the Government’s defence strategy in this landmark case. His recommendation that Ireland should pay the legal costs of the case would see a hefty legal bill for the Irish taxpayer - another consequence of the ‘persistent widespread and serious’ failure by Government to obey and uphold a fundamental law which is supposed to protect public health and the environment.

Whether any of this makes any real difference will depend in part on whether people know about it. So far the Government Press people are playing a blinder in killing the story. The line is that this is all ancient history and they're reformed characters now...

The full text of the Advocate General’s Opinion is on the European Court’s website at www.curia.eu.int. Go here and click on the case number in the top right corner (Case C-494/01) to Access Full Text of Advocate General's Opinion.