Dr. Simon Mills:

I was going to go on and deal with that in a moment. One possibility is that it presupposes that it is required; I am not sure that it is. The second issue that arises is whether it might be thought an appropriate step to take, politically. If there was a referendum on the Constitution and there was a positive statement, as with abortion legislation, that the Oireachtas may legislate for assisted dying, then that would seem to strengthen the underpinning of any legislation that might be introduced, but it is not necessary because any legislation introduced by the Oireachtas has the presumption of constitutionality. That is the end of the story, to some extent. For anyone wishing to challenge the legislation, it would be to impugn the presumption of constitutionality. Even if there was a referendum which introduced it, I think the same test would still apply to challenging the presumption of constitutionality. I stress that I am not and would never hold myself out as being a constitutional lawyer. If this remains a live issue for the committee and it has outstanding points of concern, although I am more than willing to come back and help the committee with any questions further down the line, I suggest if the committee has outstanding points of concern that one of the constitutional lawyers who previously attended the committee may be of assistance in addressing those outstanding points of concern. As I said, I think the answer, ultimately, is that any legislation introduced would have the presumption of constitutionality. The comments made in the Fleming case about legislation and issues of complex social policy, as interpreted by Dr. Mulligan and Dr. Hickey, which I think is the correct interpretation of Fleming, are also something the committee could reasonably bear in mind.