Plaintiff fails to demonstrate that his interests have been adversely affected by gender quota legislation

Plaintiff seeks to challenge the constitutional validity of s. 17 (4B) of the Electoral Act 1997 (“the 1997 Act”), as inserted by s. 42 (c) of the Electoral (Amendment) (Political Funding) Act 2012 - Part III of the 1997 Act deals with State payments to qualified political parties - a party must be properly registered and its candidates must have obtained not less than 2% of the total first preference votes cast at the last preceding general election - each qualified party that applies receives an annual allocation of funds comprising the euro equivalent of IR£100,000 - section 17 (4B) states that the allocation of funds shall be reduced by 50% unless at least 30% of the candidates are women and at least 30% are men - plaintiff is a member of a political party who received a letter from his party stating that the candidate selection for the election would take place in October 2015 and there would be three candidates seeking selection, the plaintiff and two women - the letter also stated that the winning candidate would be a woman - plaintiff says this offends his constitutional rights - defendants argue that the Constitution confers specific competence on the Oireachtas to legislate in the manner it has done in enacting section 17 (4B) of the 1997 Act - this jurisdiction ranks 86th out of 140 in countries worldwide in terms of percentage representation by women - the State acceded to the 1979 UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women in 1985 - section 17 (4B) is gender neutral - the sanction imposed is not criminal in nature - parties entitled to engage in fund raising - plaintiff failed to satisfy the court that a 50% reduction in the funding otherwise available to the party under s. 17 of the 1997 Act, would, if applied, make it impossible or significantly difficult for the party to continue to function - there were a number of other strategies available to the party to meet the candidate gender quota other than by the exclusion of the plaintiff - the plaintiff has failed to satisfy the court that his exclusion from the Dublin Central candidate selection convention was a requirement imposed on the party by section 17 (4B) of the 1997 Act, rather than a decision made entirely at the discretion of the party - this case does not fall into the rare category of cases where those whose rights are affected cannot speak for themselves - the plaintiff has failed to satisfy the court that the impugned provision is directed at or operable against a group interest or common interest in opposing gender quotas shared between the plaintiff and the party - plaintiff failed to demonstrate that any of his interests have been adversely affected - plaintiff's claim is dismissed.