In a referendum held in Ireland on Friday, residents rejected the reform aimed at modernizing references to women and the family in the Constitution, written in 1937 and heir to the long and strong influence of the Catholic Church on life public and private. “I think it is clear at this point that the amendments (…) were rejected »said Prime Minister Leo Varadkar on Saturday March 9. “It was our responsibility to convince a majority of people to vote ‘yes’ and we failed to do so”he added, while the results of the referendum have not yet been officially published.
A symbolic blow for women, and contrary to the main parties which had defended the “yes”, Irish voters thus disapproved a modification of the Constitution which notably intended to broaden the concept of family beyond the notion of marriage, and erase the priority role of mothers in ensuring “domestic duties” in a home. But this referendum aroused little enthusiasm, with participation which did not exceed 50% in most of the 39 constituencies, according to estimates published by the Irish media.
Before the Prime Minister spoke, several other members of the government had already conceded defeat, the Minister for Equality, Roderic O’Gorman, quoted by the daily The Irish Timessaying he was disappointed and regretted that people did not “did not see the urgency for change” of the Constitution. “The people have spoken. He has made his voice heard and must be heard. The government’s proposals have failed.reacted the leader of Sinn Fein, Mary Lou McDonald.
Before the vote, Prime Minister Leo Varadkar estimated that a “no” victory would make ” A step back “ in the country. “It would send a message to many people that they are not a family under our Constitution”he said, while it would be maintained “the very old-fashioned language about women in the home, and the duties of mothers in the home”.
“No one knows what a “lasting relationship” is”
Ireland, a country of the European Union with 5.3 million inhabitants, legalized marriage for same-sex couples in 2015, and abortion in 2018. The government was counting on this double referendum, organized on 8 March, International Women’s Rights Day, and at a time when France ratified the inclusion of the right to abortion in its own Constitution, to further erase the mark left by the Catholic Church in the country’s institutions.
“It’s a sad day for those who have campaigned for decades to get rid of these sexist words” in the Constitution, reacted Labor senator Marie Sherlock on RTE radio.
“The people have spoken. He has made his voice heard and must be heard. The government’s proposals have failed.said, for her part, the leader of Sinn Fein, Mary Lou McDonald, a “yes” supporter, accusing the executive of not having consulted sufficiently upstream on the proposed reform.
“This is a significant victory for the people against the political establishment”congratulated Peadar Toibin, leader of the conservative Aontu party, who had supported the “no” vote to Agence France-Presse. “The government defended these amendments as if they were progressive (…) but in reality they were not”in particular with regard to their repercussions on the care owed to the most fragile in society, he added
Two questions
Until a few days before the election, polls predicted a fairly easy “yes” victory, but the latest polls had revealed growing uncertainty. Voters had to decide on two questions. The first concerned the definition of family, proposing to broaden it to also include “lasting relationships” such as cohabiting couples and their children. The second question proposed erasing a reference deemed outdated on the role of women in the home, which suggests that they have a duty to take care of other people under their roof. A new, broader formula would place responsibility on all members of a family for caring for each other.
Opponents of these changes had criticized vague wording, particularly on the second question, and the disappearance of the words “woman” and “mother” of the text. “No one knows exactly what a “long-term relationship” is, but everyone knows exactly what a marriage is.”, had thus castigated David Quinn, founder of the Iona Institute, a group defending the interests of the Catholic community. Activists for the rights of disabled people also accused the text of disempowering the State in terms of taking care of these people.