A decision by a High Court judge that a complex legal case, launched by An Taisce, must go ahead on the basis that the Nitrates Action Programme (NAP) is “in accordance with the Nitrates Directive” has been welcomed by farm organisations.
An Taisce is challenging the “validity” of Ireland’s fifth NAP through the High Court and has brought judicial review proceedings against the Department of Housing, Heritage, and Local Government, the Environmental Assessment Unit, the state and the Attorney General.
The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM), the Irish Farmers’ Association (IFA) and Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers’ Association (ICMSA) are notice parties to the challenge.
Justice Richard Humphreys who is presiding over An Taisce’s case has published an interim judgment totaling 92,375 words setting out what issues will come before the court in relation to the case.
Justice Humphreys said this was necessary because “the state, supported by the IFA and ICMSA, has deposited an unprecedented volume of pleading-type objections into the case”.
“The question to be considered now is whether this indiscriminate scattershot of pleading objections is meritorious,” he stated.
Justice Humphreys also outlined that the case involved an “embarrassment of issues”.
“A total of 78 different questions were identified on the issue paper – a record-breaking number in this list.
“There comes a point where the complexity of a matter reaches a critical level such that the most practical way of navigating through it is to take matters in a bite-sized way.
“To try to answer that many issues in one go would be virtually impossible and would ensure that one would not give due attention to one or more of the myriad of aspects of the problem,” Justice Humphreys detailed in his judgement.
He has set out that the “case must proceed on the basis that the NAP is in accordance with the Nitrates Directive, save to the extent that provisions of the Nitrates Directive overlap with other pleaded points”.
Farm organisations
Justice Humphreys’ interim judgement on the case has been welcomed by farm organisations because they believe that it sends clarity to farmers on where they currently stand.
IFA president, Francie Gorman, said: “The NAP and the derogation will stand while these matters are being considered. This will be a huge relief for thousands of farm families up and down the country.”
He said evidence provided by farm organisations and farmers had “demonstrated the impact removing the derogation would have on their farm businesses”.
“An Taisce benefit from cost protection orders to take cases such as this to the courts, but farmers do not have any such protection.
“We have to put our own funds on the line to protect our livelihoods.
“I will be asking An Taisce to sit down with the IFA to have a rational discussion about these issues. The courtroom is not a place to set policy,” Gorman added.
Derogation
Meanwhile the ICMSA said that thousands of farmers in derogation would “at least have that degree of certainty” from the interim judgement.
ICMSA president, Denis Drennan said: “Whatever judgement that would ultimately be handed down – and for the sake of rural Ireland it had better allow the continuation of the nitrates derogation.
“This case has to end the comic opera that had the farmer organisations as the only parties in this High Court case who were paying their own way and not passing the bill back to the taxpayers.
“The state must look at the way it enables and funds – directly or indirectly – challenges against its own duly decided policy.”