King’s College London (KCL) Professor Andrew Blick, director of the King’s Centre for British Democracy, delivered a testimony before the Irish High Court in a constitutional case that could significantly reshape cabinet governance in Ireland.
The court is currently deciding whether allowing “super juniors” (equivalent to ministers of state) at cabinet meetings violates the Irish Constitution.
Legal member of the Irish parliament (Teachtaí Dála or TD), Patrick ‘Pa’ Daly, brought the case forward, arguing that only full cabinet ministers – those formally appointed under Article 28 of the Constitution – should attend cabinet meetings.
Daly and his lawyer contended that including super junior ministers, despite their lack of voting rights, undermines the principle of cabinet confidentiality.
Professor Blick’s testimony took place on 10 July 2025, regarding the United Kingdom’s constitutional approach to non-minister attendance in cabinet and the historical background of Westminster cabinet governance.
Professor Blick stated:
“It was intriguing to discover that my work could be of significance in another country. I have been researching the history of Cabinet government and how it operates for many years.”
Although Ireland’s government system differs from that of the UK, British traditions have influenced its development.
Since the mid-1990s, Ireland has permitted super juniors to attend cabinet meetings without being formal cabinet members.
This longstanding arrangement, however, has never been tested in court.
Critics warn that granting non-cabinet members access to legal discussions could breach the Constitution.
A ruling in favour of Daly, according to experts, may require significant changes to ministerial appointments and cabinet access restrictions, altering the structure of executive decision-making.
However, previous Taoiseach (head of the Irish government), Leo Varadkar, argued that the issue may lie in the constitutional limit of 15 senior minsters. While Varadkar sought to combat this by appointing three super juniors, he upheld that there may be benefit to loosening the senior minister restriction.
The High Court’s impending ruling also arrives at a time when constitutional norms are under scrutiny globally.
In Canada, for example, recent debates over the use of prorogation and executive discretion raised questions about the balance between legal authority and political convention in parliamentary systems.
Professor Blick’s testimony contributes to this wider discussion, demonstrating how scholarly insight can provide clarity to constitutional changes in democracies such as Ireland.
A three-judge panel of the Irish High Court will now review the testimony of Professor Blick and other constitutional experts. A ruling clarifying the legal standing of super junior ministers in Ireland is expected later this month.
