Talk:Dáil Courts

Removed

"The IRA had taken an oath of allegiance to the Dáil in August 1920, which was withdrawn by many in April 1922."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)

Judge Russell in 1922

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)

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)

'Efficacy' of the Republican Courts

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)

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."

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)

Lots to chew on. Many thanks. RashersTierney (talk) 01:15, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Brehon, French and Roman law

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) ?