Sir -- On September 20, Emer O'Kelly wrote in this paper that the right to defend your home should not be seen as a licence to kill. I couldn't agree more, nor could the Irish courts.

What I want to achieve is the protection of home occupiers from civil actions by burglars who are injured on their property. I want to prevent home occupiers who use reasonable force to defend their home from being criminally prosecuted for assault.

In Irish constitutional law the family home is sacred. It is actually afforded special status in Article 40.5, which states that "The dwelling of every citizen is inviolable and shall not be forcibly entered save in accordance with law".

You might expect that constitutional provision to be reflected in our statute laws but it isn't. The Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997 states that, where force is used in protection of people or property, "the fact that a person had an opportunity to retreat before using force shall be taken into account, in conjunction with other relevant evidence, in determining whether the use of force was reasonable".

That position was rejected by the Court of Criminal Appeal in the 2006 case of DPP v Barnes.

That case concerned a horse-breeder living in an isolated rural area who interrupted two burglars in the process of ransacking his home. One of the burglars claimed that the householder attacked him with a knife, resulting in a struggle in which the householder was killed.

In the trial that followed, the court considered a legal doctrine known as 'the castle doctrine' and accepted it into Irish Common Law. The castle doctrine stipulates that while there is a duty on a person attacked in the street to retreat, this obligation does not exist where the person is in their own home. The court stressed that the castle doctrine is NOT a licence to kill; rather it means that the householder can stand his ground and need not retreat from an attack in order to defend his own home. The court went on to hold that every burglary is an act of aggression, and every burglar an aggressor.

In Barnes the Court of Criminal Appeal put a clear onus on the Oireachtas to deliver such legal certainty. Thus far, this Government has failed to provide the certainty needed.

Charles Flanagan TD,

Fine Gael Spokesperson on Justice, Equality and Law Reform

Protect the elderly now

Sir -- I'm just 83 years' old and I have been listening to the reports on the vicious attack on Paddy Barry last week.

Those attacks on the elderly have been going on for a long number of years. Since my own wife died some years ago, I've been living alone and am fearful of being attacked and injured.

This cowardly, spineless Government ruling our country have done nothing to protect and save the lives of elderly people living in fear of criminals roaming our once-lovely country. The only thing that concerns them is saving their seats in Leinster House.

In view of this, I have taken steps to protect myself and my house from the thugs. If someone is killed -- and I hope it won't be me -- tough!

It is very sad to say but I am now living in the best country in the world to be a criminal in. A lot of people in high places and government know this to be true.

God save Ireland from them.

Name and address with Editor

Yes will mean last Euro poll

Sir -- I was interested to hear Justice Frank Clarke refer to the Crotty Supreme Court judgment of 1987 on Morning Ireland last week. Raymond Crotty was my father and Judge Clarke was quite right in pointing out that the case was lost in some areas relating to economics.

As I recall, the Supreme Court found that because we were in the EEC, which was an economic community, there was no case to be answered in relation to economic issues. Essentially the Supreme Court ruled that when we joined the then EEC in 1973, we joined a developing economic community and that most of the provisions of the Single European Act, which my father challenged, were part of that development and therefore did not need to be ratified by a referendum.

However, the foreign policy provisions in the Single European Act did require a referendum because they were the start of a move towards a political union, then incipient and embryonic, but now culminating in Lisbon and the EU Constitution.

Having read the Lisbon Treaty, I cannot conceive of an area of legislation which is not covered by this treaty. In constitutional terms, Lisbon would turn Ireland into a regional or provincial state within a new federal-style European Union, with the EU's constitution and laws having legal primacy over the Irish constitution and laws in any cases of conflict between the two.

Ireland would thus formally cease to be a sovereign independent state in its own right in the international community of states, and become like a provincial state inside aN EU federation.

The inevitable implication of this is that this will be the last time that the Irish government will be obliged to give the people of Ireland a referendum on a European Union treaty.

Mary Crotty,

Killiney, Co Dublin

Yes will mean last Euro poll

Sir -- I fail to understand why it is "undemocratic" to ask the Irish people to return to the polls on Lisbon. What possible threat could a second referendum pose to anyone who votes in accordance with their conscience?

Genuine concerns expressed during last year's campaign in relation to tax, neutrality and the right to life have all been addressed through legal guarantees.

The Government has also secured a deal which will allow us to retain our commissioner. And if the last year has shown us anything, it's that the EU is vital to Ireland's recovery.

There's no doubt, for example, that without the liquidity provided by the ECB, our banks would be in far worse straits. The upcoming referendum provides us with an opportunity to commit to the spirit of shared responsibility enshrined in the treaty.

Marie Murphy,

Malahide, Co Dublin

Thank you to diaspora

Sir -- Only for the millions of pounds that was sent home by Irish emigrants in the early to mid part of the last century, many a family would have gone under. They worked damned hard, fed and educated us and got little or nothing in return.

Now once again we are calling on the great Irish diaspora to dig us out of another hole. I would hope that this time there would be something in it for them as well.

Jim Jackman,

Castleknock, Dublin 15

Leave my team alone

Sir -- I am disgusted to read Dion Fanning's article. How someone who claims to be a journalist can write such offensive rubbish is beyond me. He needs to issue an apology to all Man City fans and players. He should also never be allowed to write again. Anyone who needs to resort to using language of this type is clearly an uneducated disgrace to his profession.

To attack the players like this is totally unfair. I will be taking this further.

Liam Willingham,

via email

Article was pitch perfect

Sir -- A thank you to Dion Fanning for his excellent commentary (Sunday Independent, September 13, 2009). I too sat in the Hogan Stand in 1981 to watch Offaly's first hurling win.

Being from Galway I did not enjoy the day as he did, but I will never forget the previous September when my Dad brought me onto the pitch after Galway's first win in 60-odd years. For a young boy raised to love hurling, that was a sacred act indeed.

Micheal O'Doherty,

via email