LAST UPDATE | 29 Mar 2023

A FORMER PRINCIPAL of Wilson’s Hospital secondary school has described Enoch Burke’s “public outbursts” at a religious service and a follow-up dinner where he voiced his opposition to “a request” to call a student by a different name and pronoun as being “wholly disrespectful,” “serious misbehaviour” and “unprofessional.”

Niamh McShane, who was Principal of the school between 2016 and 2022, appeared in court today at a later than scheduled time today, as it was not clear if Burke was made aware that the case was due to start at 9.30am.

The High Court hearing is dealing with the ongoing dispute between teacher Enoch Burke and Wilson’s Hospital School over disciplinary proceedings resulting in his suspension from work.

McShane told the High Court hearing that in May 2022 she sent an email to staff at the Co Westmeath school, which she described as a “request” to refer to a student at the school who wished to transition by a different name.

In reply to questions from the school’s counsel Mark Connaughton SC she said despite Burke’s objection to the request, and she had attempted to reach an accommodation with him to see if a compromise could be found over the issue.

He had voiced his opposition to a request in emails and at a staff meeting. “We tried to find a situation where the teacher and the student could be supported, and we tried to be absolutely fair with Mr Burke,” she said, adding that ultimately none could be found.

She said that on 21 June last Burke had made an outburst during a service to mark the 260th anniversary of the school’s foundation, calling on Ms McShane to withdraw what he described as the school’s “demand” to “recognise transgenderism.”

She said that nobody was being asked by the school to accept “transgenderism”, and that the reason behind the request was to comply with the school’s ethos of acceptance and to protect the welfare, safety and duty of care owed to the school to one of its students.

She said that Burke “public” comments in front of students, teachers, parents, clergy, and other stakeholders was “embarrassing” for her personally, those in attendance and “horrific” for the student in question.

She said that several students who attended the service had walked out of the chapel.

She said the students were “annoyed and upset” over what had happened, and that she had tried to defuse the situation.

At the follow-up dinner she said she “felt hunted a little” by Burke, who she said had been present in the hall, but did not appear to join in the meal.

She said Burke approached her twice during the meal, and explained that he on one of those occasions got very close and in her personal space, and asked her to drop the request about the student.

McShane who was on crutches at the time, said she told him: “Not now Enoch and not tonight Enoch”.

Later that evening as the event was coming to an end, she felt concerned over what had happened and was walked back to her then residence on the school’s property by two others who had attended the event.

McShane was giving evidence on the second day of the school’s action against the Co Mayo teacher where it seeks to justify its decision for bringing disciplinary proceedings against him.

In the days afterwards McShane said she gave some consideration to what had happened, and took advice on the matter.

She was also concerned about Burke’s future behaviour in the school, given the manner he had publicly objected to the request.

She said came to the conclusion that Burke’s public actions amounted to gross misbehaviour and a breach of teacher’s professional code of conduct.

While she was in the process of leaving the school to take up another job, she decided to initiate disciplinary action against Burke.

She complied a report and presented it to the school’s board of directors, in the hope that it might bring about a resolution between the school and Burke.

Following a meeting in August which Burke attended the board took the decision to suspend Burke.

She said she rejected contentions by Burke that the matter had been predetermined or that the contents of the report have been discussed with the board members in Burke’s absence.

She also told the court that when she was presenting the report at a disciplinary meeting last January, which had been put on hold following Burke’s incarceration, she had to shout in order to be heard by the board, as members of the Burke family were shouting, saying that she could not be heard and that nobody was listening to her.

A former teacher at the school Catherin Gibson Brabazon told the court that she was present at the service and meal.

She said that she was horrified at Burke’s interjection during the service, which she said was “a diatribe” and “a very personalised attack on Ms McShane.” which she also described as “a cheap shot.”

In reply to Rosemary Mallon Bl for the school, Brabazon said she rejected Burke’s claim that he had spoken in a measured and respectful manner at the service.

Burke had “hijacked the service,” she added.

She said she could not believe that something like this could happen in “a place of sanctity and sanctuary.”

As Burke got to his feet to speak, she said the school’s Chaplain told Burke that this was not the time nor the place.

She said she did not know who Burke was and after approaching him she said she “rocked on her heels” when he said that he was a teacher at the school.

She said Burke told her that the school’s founder Andrew Wilson “would be spinning in his grave” if he knew what was happening at the school.

She said she told Burke that if that was his view, he should consider “his own position at the school.”

At the follow-up meal, she said Burke did not appear to be happy.

She added that he was prevented by others from speaking with McShane during that gathering.

Burke, who claims his suspension was unlawful denies any wrongdoing, and in a counterclaim says that the school’s direction was a breach of his constitutional rights and was forcing him to accept “transgenderism” which is against his religious beliefs.

Burke was not present in the courts for the hearing, having been excluded by the judge on the opening day of the hearing.

Justice Owens deemed Burke to be in contempt in the fact of the court, after the teacher’s was deemed to be interrupting proceedings, after the court refused his application to look into issues concerning the discovery of documents in the case.

The judge said that Burke can view the case via a video-link and can return to the court after he gives an undertaking to comply with the rules of court.

Burke declined to do so, and neither he nor his family attended at the court today.

It was not known if he tuned in on the video link.

Justice Owens said it was his preference that Burke be present for the hearing.

Earlier today Alex White SC for the school said that in light of the issues raised by Burke about documents that had been exchanged between the sides in advance of the proceedings, “certain steps had been taken”.

Burke had claimed that the documents had been tampered with, and that other material he claimed he had sought were not provided to him.

The judge rejected Burke’s claims about the documents being tampered with but asked the school to address the issues raised by Burke in respect of that material.

White said that the school had not tampered with anything, but in the interests of progressing matters had furnished the teacher with unredacted documents and had waived its entitlement not to provide him with material it said was not relevant to Burke.

Certain material was not being provided on the grounds that it was not relevant to Burke, and referred to other issues counsel said.

Burke’s claims about materials being tampered with amounted to a “conspiracy theory” White added.

Justice Owens said he was satisfied with the school’s explanation about the documents and accepted that the material “did not contain the third secret of Fatima.”

Burke excluded from attending proceedings

Burke was yesterday excluded from attending the proceedings until he agrees to comply with the rules of court and not interrupt the case, after Justice Alexander Owens found the Co Mayo evangelical Christian to be in contempt of the face of the court.

Burke declined to give the undertaking sought by the judge, and was not allowed enter the courtroom, but was given the option of viewing the proceedings via a video link.

He and his family then left the Four Courts complex, and it is not known if they took up the video link option.

When the case resumed this morning at 9.30am, which is an earlier start than normal, neither Burke nor his family were present.

Justice Owens asked if Burke had been made aware of the start time but was told by counsel for the school Alex White SC that while his side had written to Burke on other matters, it had not told him about the start time.

Counsel said that he did not know where Burke was, stating that while he was not in court, he had not attended at the school either.

As a result, the judge said that he was adjourning the matter to 11am, the usual time cases commence.

The judge had yesterday said he would sit earlier and later than usual to ensure the case finishes before the Easter Holidays commence on Friday.

In the proceedings the school claims that the main issue is if the school was entitled to suspend Burke, arising out of the manner in which he voiced his objections to a direction by the school to refer to a student who wished to transition by a different first name and pronoun.

Burke disputes this and says his suspension is unlawful and in breach of his rights including his rights to freedom of religious express, and claims the whole case concerns his religious objections to transgenderism.

Earlier this month, Justice President of the Court of Appeals Justice George Birmingham made clear his disagreement with some of the foundational arguments underpinning Burke’s core claims.

In a forthright opinion, Justice Birmingham wrote: “I am of the view this case is not about what the appellant has chosen to describe as ‘transgenderism’, and I would prefer to express my views in terms of the fact that the case is not about transgender rights.

“I cannot but believe that the term, as used by the appellant, is a somewhat pejorative one, as is his use of the term transgender “ideology”.

“These are phrases I prefer to avoid; I do not believe they are phrases that in today’s Ireland would find favour with transgender individuals and I would wish to respect their preferences in that regard.”

In other words, the court rejected the idea, which has been repeated by certain media outlets, that issues pertaining to transgender identity are at the heart of the case.

The school says the proceedings have nothing to do with Burke’s religious beliefs.

The ongoing proceedings between the parties have resulted in many court hearings and have seen Burke and members of his family removed from courtrooms by gardaí for interrupting the proceedings.

Earlier this month, Burke, his parents and three of his siblings were removed, amid chaotic scenes, from the Court of Appeal while it was in the process of rejecting his appeal against injunctions made against him by the High Court.

Burke has subsequent to the Court of Appeal’s ruling written to that court asking it to overturn its findings.