M3 route could fail a judicial
review
Dear sir - in the Supreme Court on the 21st. December
1972, my grand uncle Cearbhall Ó Dálaigh
delivered judgment on the legality of the compulsory
purchase by the State of a site below the 400ft contour
lines on Tara. In the judgement, he stated: "The Hill of
Tara is properly to be regarded as a single unified site
and not a series of separate archaeological
monuments".
During proceedings, Professor Ruaidhrí de Valera
had described Tara as "the focus of Celtic times", and
added that "one would expect important findings on almost
any part of the Hill of Tara, and from the historical
accounts of it, it seemed very likely that traces of
previous occupational use would be found in most if not
all parts of the hill". The defendants in the case, the
Commissioners for Public Works in Ireland had stated:
"Tara was a complex but unified site and not merely a
site of royal settlement but probably an extension of the
grave system more extensively investigated on the Boyne.
The burden of the evidence showed the importance of the
whole site, with the Hill of Tara which could not be
chopped up".
In judgement, Cearbhall Ó Dálaigh stated:
"The expression 'national monument' means a monument or
the remains of a monument, the preservation of which, is
a matter of national importance by reason of the
historical, architectural, traditional, artistic, or
archaeological interest. A monument, among other things,
is anything that by its survival commemorates a person,
action or event".
Continuing, he stated: "The word 'monument' is not
defined in the strict Sense - it is stated that it
'includes' certain things. It does not have to be of
archaeological interest; historical or traditional
interest will suffice".
In closing, Cearbhall Ó Dálaigh asked:
"Why, then, could a place or hill, not of itself satisfy
the definition of monument?"
This Supreme Court judgement and the testimony of
Professor de Valera have a direct relevance to any
prospective legal challenges. It suggests that the
proposed route of the M3 would fail a judicial review. An
alternative route, 2.5km shorter and 5km away to the west
of Tara is available. This alternative solution should be
pursued now to ensure the immediate delivery of the
M3.
Like many others in Meath that would use a new M3, I see
this as the best way forward - preservation and progress
are not mutually exclusive.
Yours sincerely,
PROINSIAS MAC FHEARGHUSA,
Navan,
Co. Meath.
© The Meath Chronicle, 20th. August 2005.
