Jump to content

Talk:Dáil Courts

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Removed

[edit]

"The IRA had taken an oath of allegiance to the Dáil in August 1920, which was withdrawn by many in April 1922." This is irrelevant to the courts, and the oath was a dual one to the Dail and the Republic, which led on directly to the civil war in 1922.86.42.205.203 (talk) 16:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Judge Russell in 1922

[edit]

I've added this and will bring a ref - an essay by a son of George Gavan Duffy in the JRSAI - when I can find it. It was the beginning of the end. It would be non-POV to say that the courts' activities in their short history were patchy overall, but better than nothing if your neighbours decided to rustle your cattle.86.42.207.57 (talk) 13:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I think the winding up process is the critical phase for insights into the period and personalities. I have some notes by Russell himself lying around, but not to hand at the moment. Re. the 'patchiness' of the courts, the extraordinary thing is that anything remotely resembling a civil court could exist given the general circumstances.Looking forward to your contribs.RashersTierney (talk) 21:10, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Efficacy' of the Republican Courts

[edit]

The efficacy of any system depends on Point of View. How can you 'quantify' the effectiveness of one aspect of a judicial system except comparatively? If that is the case, against which judicial systems should the Republican Courts be measured, and how, if at all, is the efficacy of other Courts measured? RashersTierney (talk) 23:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks User:RashersTierney for your post re my edits of the article. I rarely get compliments so I am happy to chip in my views here for you:
I agree with you that:
  • there was a complex relationship between the institutions of the Irish Republic and the nascent institutions of the new Irish Free State;
  • the Dáil Courts were deliberately suppressed (- and I have added into the Article the laws under which this was done); and
  • and the overriding necessity for doing so was to indisputably control the 'new' judiciary was the overriding reason.
But to me none of that is surprising. The IFS founders wished to create based on the rule of law. That could not have been achieved if the Courts were somehow 'apart' from the State or were not bound by the laws of the IFS. I think that was the only course realistic open to the IFS government. It seems to me that that was an object the IFS Government openly pursued. Anyway, my words count for little - Here is a quote from Mr. Justice Hanna (pg. 31 of his statute book referred to in the Article):


"Abuses crept in, and in many instances litigants who anticipated an adverse decision inthe British Courts resorted to the Dáil Courts to restrain their opponents from the continuance of the proceedings in the other Court. There were traces that they were used as channels of corruption, and by persons not in search of justice but anxious for the obstruction of justice. Accordinly, the Government of the Saórstat [by that word, the Judge means the Irish Republic - Note also in the Article how the way Saorstát Éireann is used to describe the Irish Free State in the definitioni the 1923 Act of a Dail Court...], succeeding to the Provisional Government, was faced with one or two alternatives, either to reconstruct and perfect the improvised tribunals of the First Dáil, or to stabilixe and confirm the official State Courts, which had been now taken over by them from the British with their complete machinery. To avoid this duplication and abuse which had crept in, the Executive decided that the Dáil Courts should go, and that provision should be made for bringing to a close all pending proceedings."[1]
Beyond that as to efficacy, yes there was a mixed picture....but the Dail Courts' overarching objective at conception was not to be a worldclass court system - it was a more modest objective - to undermine the British system - and simply by referring to the number of Dail Courts that were established, one can see that the Dail Courts were very effective in that objective.
That is about all I have to contribute to the Dail Courts article. Good luck with it. If you think you can weave in the above quote, it might add something. Regards. Redking7 (talk) 22:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lots to chew on. Many thanks. RashersTierney (talk) 01:15, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Mr. Justice Henry Hanna of the High Court of the Irish Free State, The Statute Law of the Irish Free State, 1922-1928, Dublin, Alex Thom & Company, Limited, Cow Street, 1929

Brehon, French and Roman law

[edit]

The laws and precedence of the Irish Republic were taken from the law that existed in Ireland on the day Dáil Éireann first sat, (21st of January 1919), with the addition of all Dáil decrees issued from that date. It was theoretically possible to cite Brehon, French and Roman law

Why Roman Law ? Ireland (unlike England/Wales) was never part of the Roman empire and why French law ? 213.40.129.129 (talk) 13:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC) ?[reply]

Without going back to primary docs, , my sense is the framer's intention was that the courts should not be excluded from referencing any familiar (to lawyers) principle of law, irrespective of provenance, that might allow for greater equity. Essentially what was being proposed was that the new courts should not feel themselves confined to precedent in the Common Law. The Common Law, as the most familiar system, would still form the basis. Marrying different systems, evidently, was not so easy to put into practice. RashersTierney (talk) 18:02, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Do we know that anyone ever did cite these laws? Who knew them to cite them? I think it was added later as a sort of feel-good thing. The courts were arguably the only civil-administration part of the Irish Republic that worked. I'd like to find or see quoted here some of the local former-unionists' comment on them, as many of them were surprised and impressed at the generally even-handed process.Red Hurley (talk) 17:23, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Red. James Creed Meredith, if I remember correctly, quoted Brehon Law on at least one occasion. Give me a few days to get refs. The Supreme Court judges of the Republican Courts were ground-breaking specialists of their day. It wasn't just some bunch of disgruntled farm labourers making it up as they went along. Issues of the law and social justice were academically anchored.RashersTierney (talk) 22:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The arrangment could have been a makeshift comprimise between a set of not entirely satisfactory alternatives. They didnt want to be over reliant on pre 1919 British/Common law for obvious idelogical reasons. The most obvious alternative -Brehon Law probably suffered from being poorly documented (based on folklore and custom) and often outdated. The decision to include French and Roman law was probably based on a certain degree of knowledge (and texts) being available. 213.40.220.196 (talk) 20:32, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why French law ? They were Republicans attempting to establish a legal system so the worlds first modern Republic would have been the most obvious place to look to. 81.159.8.1 (talk) 17:01, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Offences

[edit]

Among the offences dealt with by the courts were ....post-office robberies. Were Post offices in Ireland not still operated by the British postmaster general (or had the Dail managed to assume control of some/all of them ?) Why would a Dail court be particularly interested in a robbery at a Royal Mail post office ? 86.112.252.217 (talk) 21:09, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A very good question that in a way goes to the heart of why these institutions were put in place. During any war there is competition for authority, but also personal opportunity by 'ignoring all rules'. Creating 'chaos' might be a short term strategy by a prospective new State, but (so far) only until they can replace the previous one. In this case neither 'government' supported Anarchy. For the same reason that the Land Courts were provoked by the 'illegal' appropriation of land, the Irish Republic (in so far as it was controlled by the Ministries) was determined to preserve the primacy of property rights.RashersTierney (talk) 21:52, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It may have been the case that in the early days of their existance the Dail courts were not particularly interested in robberies at post offices but that attitudes would have changed as time went on -particularly after "the truce" when the realisation set in that said post offices would soon be "inherited" by the Dail ? 213.40.220.196 (talk) 20:20, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
From its establishment, the Dáil , through these courts, was determined to oversee 'law and order' in Ireland. They envisage a rapid transition of authority from Westminister to the new Parliament in the area of 'policing and justice' that long predated the truce. RashersTierney (talk) 21:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tidying up needed

[edit]

Rashers would you ever tidy up some of the good stuff you have added. "The new system of Dáil Courts established on 29 June 1920 was therefore much more ambitious and more geographically than its predecessor." - sort of thing.Red Hurley (talk) 17:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't researched this area for a while, but I will give it another bash. RashersTierney (talk) 22:02, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How time flies. I will re-visit. Would welcome input from others. RashersTierney (talk) 22:03, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cases of murder etc.

[edit]

Were any criminal cases for murder, injury or assault ever adjudicated by the Dáil Courts?86.42.206.188 (talk) 10:42, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References and Sources

[edit]

I have had a go at tidying up the refs, putting the sources into alphabetical and date order, and using {sfn} and {harvnb} to link the shortform refs to the sources. I have assumed that Kotsonouris (a) was the first of the Kotsonouris sources. Can anyone confirm that this was what was meant. I cannot resolve the Carey / Casey connundrum. Works in the sources are listed as Casey, JP, but in the refs as Carey, JP. If they were books, I could track it down from the title, but it appears they are journals, to which I do not have access. Can anyone confirm which is correct, please? Bob1960evens (talk) 09:34, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dáil Courts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:59, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dáil Courts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dáil Courts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:17, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dáil_Courts&oldid=1201324762"