09-07-2025
Super junior ministers treated 'identically' to senior ministers, court told
Super-junior ministers are treated 'identically' to senior ministers at meetings of Government and have the ability to influence Government decision-making, former Cabinet member Shane Ross has said.
Mr Ross, who served as Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport from 2016 to 2020, was on Wednesday giving evidence at the hearing of People Before Profit-Solidarity TD Paul Murphy's High Court action challenging the attendance of super-junior ministers at Cabinet meetings.
Advertisement
During his cross-examination of Mr Ross, the Attorney General Rossa Fanning claimed Mr Ross illegally breached a Constitutional obligation to respect the confidentiality of Cabinet meetings by publishing a book with accounts of discussion at such meetings. Mr Ross denied any illegality.
The Cabinet confidentiality provision is one of several sections of the Constitution Mr Murphy's case claims is breached by the attendance of super-junior Ministers at Cabinet.
Among the reliefs sought by Mr Murphy is an injunction restraining super-junior Ministers from going to Government meetings.
Minister of State attending Cabinet, or super-junior ministers, are appointed by the government on the nomination of the Taoiseach.
Advertisement
They participate at government meetings but do not vote.
Senior government ministers are appointed by the President of Ireland on the advice of the Taoiseach and with the prior approval of Dáil Éireann.
Mr Fanning is leading the defence to the proceedings brought against the Taoiseach, the Government, Ireland and the Attorney General.
The hearing into Mr Murphy's action began on Wednesday, immediately following the conclusion of submissions in a similar case brought by Sinn Féin TD Pa Daly.
Advertisement
Led in his evidence by John Rogers SC, Mr Ross said super-junior ministers were treated 'identically' to senior ministers in the context of Cabinet meetings during his tenure in Government.
Mr Ross said they participated fully in discussions at meetings, and agreed that they were never 'curtailed' from participating by virtue of their 'nominally lower status'.
Mr Ross agreed that super-junior ministers were able to influence Government decision-making. On one occasion, Finian McGrath, a super-junior minister between 2016 and 2020, 'changed the Government's mind' on a specific Cabinet decision after he threatened to resign, Mr Ross said.
Put to him by Mr Fanning that there is a difference between having political influence and being a member of Government, and that many people can exercise political influence, Mr Ross said being present at Cabinet is 'not just a matter of political influence'.
Advertisement
Super-junior ministers' presence at meetings gives them a 'special influence' on legislation, Mr Ross said. 'I saw it – they have a much greater influence than other ministers of state.'
Closing his cross-examination, Mr Fanning put to Mr Ross that he breached the Constitutional obligation to respect the confidentiality of Cabinet meetings in a book he wrote containing accurate descriptions of such meetings.
The book, his 2020 title In Bed with the Blueshirts, was 'an act of calculated and deliberate illegality', Mr Fanning put to him. The book, Mr Fanning claimed, was in contemptuous disregard of the Constitution.
Mr Ross denied any illegality and said the book pertained to political matters of public interest. 'I thought it was justifiable, there was plenty of precedent for it,' he said.
Advertisement
In the witness box, Mr Murphy said super-junior ministers are acting as de facto members of Government, not accountable or approved by the Dáil.
Earlier, opening Mr Murphy's case, Mr Rogers said the people of Ireland have a Constitutional right to choose their 'rulers', and the Constitution only provides for 15 members of Government to act as those 'rulers'.
Similar to Mr Daly's case, Mr Murphy's case points to article 28 of the Constitution, which limits the number of government members to 15, including the Taoiseach, and provides that they meet and act as a collective authority.
Mr Rogers said their case is challenging the arrangement whereby super-junior ministers attend meetings of government consistently and participate in Cabinet discussions as though they are members of government.
'There is no law whatsoever to say that a Minister of State is permitted to be in the government,' Mr Rogers said.
He said the Taoiseach and the Government had 'usurped a power they don't have' to bring strangers – in a constitutional sense – into the Government room, into the council chamber.
Mr Rogers submitted that a 'democratic principle' underpins the process by which deputies are nominated to Government by the Taoiseach, and approved by the Dáil, describing it an indirect election or approval on behalf of the people.
Counsel submitted that super-junior ministers attend at Cabinet and participate in Government deliberations and decisions without any process of approval in the Dáil – unlike the 15 members of Government.
'The Taoiseach nor the Government, cannot hollow out, empty, give away, the expansive powers given to them by the people in article 28,' he said.
The case, sitting before a three-judge divisional court, continues, with historian Diarmaid Ferriter and former super-junior minister Finian McGrath expected to give evidence.
