Enoch Burke placed on leave by school over nature of his protests, court told

 Enoch Burke with his mother, Martina Burke, left, and sister, Ammi Burke, outside the High Court in Dublin.

The deputy principal of Wilson’s Hospital School has said a key concern from the board of management when placing Enoch Burke on administrative leave was “what form” his “next protest” might take.

John Galligan told the High Court there was “alarm” and “worry” heading into the new school year last August, and this came after it was furnished with a report from outgoing principal Niamh McShane relating to a number of incidents.

Ms McShane told the court about these incidents, and said she “felt hunted” by Mr Burke on one particular occasion he “demanded” her to withdraw her request to address a student in the school by a different name and pronoun at their request.

Neither Mr Burke nor members of his family were present in court again this morning.

Mr Burke was suspended from the Co Westmeath secondary school last year, and was the subject of a High Court injunction, which was put in place pending the outcome of the full hearing of the dispute, over his failure to comply with the terms of his suspension which required him to stay away from the school while he was on administrative leave.

The teacher denies any wrongdoing and says that his suspension arises out of his opposition to ‘transgenderism’ and a direction by the school to refer to a student who wishes to transition by a different pronoun.

In a counterclaim, he says that the disciplinary process against him should be set aside and that it breaches his constitutional rights, including his right to freedom of expression of his religious beliefs.

Enoch Burke denies any wrongdoing and says that his suspension arises out of his opposition to ‘transgenderism’ and a direction by the school to refer to a student who wishes to transition by a different pronoun. Picture: Collins Courts

The school says that it was fully entitled to bring disciplinary proceedings against the teacher, and rejects any wrongdoing.

Mr Burke has been absent from court since Tuesday afternoon, after the judge warned him he was in contempt of court after he failed to accept a ruling over what he described as “tampered with” documents provided by the school’s legal team.

Mr Justice Owens has reiterated on several occasions that Mr Burke would be permitted re-entry to the courtroom if he agrees to obey the rulings  of the court. He did so again this morning, addressing Mr Burke in case he may be listening in remotely.

Evidence

The third day of this case began with the evidence of Wilson’s Hospital School deputy principal John Galligan.

He told the court that Mr Burke “erupted” at a staff meeting in May — a day after Ms McShane had sent an email to teachers requesting a student be addressed by their name and chosen pronoun.

Mr Galligan said that he spoke for at least five minutes, and it was through a combination of Ms McShane, the school chaplain, and another teacher that they managed to calm him down.

A week later, Mr Burke attended a meeting with Mr Galligan and Ms McShane in her office. Mr Galligan said Mr Burke voiced his opposition to “transgenderism” and said it was in opposition to his religious beliefs.

He said Mr Burke did not provide clarity on whether he would address the student by their new name.

“We weren’t any more aware as to how Mr Burke would deal with any scenario where he might have a student in his care who might wish to be called by a different name,” he said.

The deputy principal was not present at the chapel service and subsequent meal in June, but told the court he heard of events afterward.

Mr Galligan then described a meeting of the Board of Management on August 15 after Ms McShane had furnished the board with her Stage 4 report on Mr Burke’s actions. Yesterday, Ms McShane told the court that she believed what he did amounted to “serious misbehaviour”.

He said that board chair John Rogers described segments of this report at the meeting but did not furnish members with copies. He said Mr Rogers told board members they couldn’t discuss the matter at this time and “had to get the other party’s side of the story”.

School meeting

Mr Galligan said that Mr Burke was then invited to a meeting where it would be discussed whether he should be placed on administrative leave. His actual disciplinary hearing had been set for a month later in September. Mr Burke requested this meeting was too serious to be conducted by Zoom as had been proposed, and it took place in person at the school.

The deputy principal claimed that Mr Burke “wouldn’t answer questions directly” and the meeting “was going absolutely nowhere”. Mr Burke made the case that putting someone on administrative leave was a serious matter that could have implications for their career.

After Mr Burke and his sister Ammi left, the board reconvened and decided unanimously that he be placed on administrative leave.

He said that children could witness “interruption, disruption and protest” and that it “wouldn’t be a nice thing for them to witness”.

Despite having been put on leave, Mr Galligan said that Mr Burke attended staff meetings and entered the school at the beginning of the school year.

He said he “respectfully” asked Mr Burke to leave the premises, and that Mr Burke frequently told him “I’m here to work” and did not leave when instructed.

Mr Galligan said he'd attend staff meetings if there was one. Otherwise, he would just stay in his classroom. "He'd be there for the day," Mr Galligan said.

At the disciplinary hearing which eventually took place in January, Mr Galligan alleged that Mr Burke and his family frequently interrupted and shouted during proceedings.

He said they were repeatedly chanting things such as “where is Mr Rogers” and “this meeting is a sham”.

“It was very hectic,” he said. “A lot of argy-bargy from the Burkes. They surrounded us really as we left the room.” 

The case continues before Mr Justice Alexander Owens at the High Court this afternoon.