State papers: Tension between government and Mary Robinson over her efforts to expand presidency role

In April 1991, the attorney general, John Murray, advised the Cabinet that the President was prevented from expressing views in conflict with government policy under the terms of the Constitution.

Two months later, another senior barrister, Dermot Gleeson, who would subsequently serve as AG, wrote a legal paper for Mr Murray in which he argued that the President had no right to say anything in public without first securing the permission of the Government.

Mr Gleeson claimed that the Government even had power to dictate which events the President should attend.

“The constitutional scheme does not envisage conflict, and clearly envisages that the final word on presidential pronouncements should rest with the Government,” Mr Gleeson advised.

His proposed interpretation of the Constitution was adopted by Mr Murray who offered it to the Cabinet as his formal legal advice on the issue.

However, Ms Robinson challenged such advice and informed the Taoiseach, Charles Haughey that she had “extreme difficulty in accepting such a narrow and restrictive interpretation of the role of the President”. 

While the President accepted that she should not get involved in matters of Government policy and acknowledged that she would always take care to avoid any public conflict with the Government, she pointed out that she had sought and obtained “a mandate for developing the representational role of the Office”. 

Internal records from the Department of the Taoiseach, show officials were expressing concern about media interviews given by Ms Robinson without having first notified the Government.

They took particular issue with quotes from the President’s special adviser who had stated that “as long as it is not Government business or the Constitution, there is no limit on what she may discuss in interviews”. 

Such remarks were branded “injudicious” and “capable of being interpreted in a confrontational way” by officials who argued that such a position would inevitably lead to conflict with the Government.

The X case

The issue also came into focus after Ms Robinson commented on the X case which became a major public story in early 1992 when the then Attorney General, Harry Whelehan, sought a High Court order to prevent a pregnant 14-year-old rape victim from leaving the jurisdiction to have an abortion.

She told a meeting of a women’s group in Wexford that it had been “a very difficult week for women and girls here in Ireland”. 

“I hope we have the courage which we have not always had to face up to and look squarely and to see this is a problem we have got to resolve,” Ms Robinson added.

While the spokesman for the then taoiseach, Albert Reynolds, claimed Ms Robinson had been “echoing” the Government’s own concerns on the issue, the assistant secretary to the Government, Frank Murray, claimed she had created “a situation of controversy.” 

The following month, Ms Robinson stirred up further concern within the Reynolds administration when she was reported to have invited Queen Elizabeth II to visit Ireland.

It resulted in Mr Reynolds phoning the President to convey his concern at such reports and his wish to underscore “the seriousness of what had happened”. 

He even raised the prospect that her speeches and statements might need to be vetted by his officials in future.

However, Ms Robinson claimed the media reports had not reflected what she had stated and she stressed that she had “no wish whatsoever to interfere in political matters”. 

There was also unease in Government circles over Ms Robinson’s meeting with a deputation from the “Unemployed Organisation” with the government secretary, Dermot Nally questioning why it was taking place, while a Fianna Fáil backbencher had described the group as “militant left”.