Early life and education

de Londras was born in Ireland in 1980.^[1]

She studied law at University College Cork, pursuing studies to Ph.D level.^[2]

Academic career

After obtaining her Ph.D, she became a lecturer at University College Dublin's School of Law in 2008.^[2] From 2010 to 2012 she was a research fellow of the Hague Institute for the Internationalisation of Law.^[3]

In 2012 de Londras moved to the University of Durham as a Professor of Law and the Co-Director of the Durham Human Rights Centre. While in Durham, she led an EU-funded project on counter-terrorism in the European Union.^[4] She moved to the University of Birmingham in 2015 as the inaugural Chair in Global Legal Studies at Birmingham Law School.^[5]

She became an honorary professor at the Australian National University (2019-2022).^[6]

Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013

Under the 8th Amendment, de Londras was highly critical of the treatment of suicidal women under the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013. She argued that there was no legal justification for the additional burdens that women whose lives were at risk from suicide had to face in order to access abortion when compared to women whose lives were at risk from physical illness.^[17][18]

Oireachtas Committee on the 8th Amendment 2017

As well as criticising the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013, de Londras argued that the 8th Amendment was "unliveable"^[19] and unworkable,^[20] and characterised it as a "pre-emptive strike against women’s liberation".^[21] Appearing before the Oireachtas Committee on the 8th Amendment^[22] in September 2017, she argued "Constitutions should…enable the government to meet the needs of those it governs. Article 40.3.3 does not allow for a legislative structure that meets the needs of the thousands of women in Ireland who every year access abortion outside of the healthcare structures in this state".^[23] During her appearance before the Committee she was confronted by Senator Ronán Mullen who said she appeared to be incapable of using the term "unborn", and accused her of presenting advocacy rather than informed opinion. In response she said she was "agnostic" about what term was used. "Foetal life, unborn life, prenatal life, I’m happy to use any of those...I don’t have any problem with using a different word."^[24]

Referendum Campaign 2018

During the referendum on repeal of the 8th Amendment de Londras played a prominent role in explaining the proposed changes to the law. With Máiréad Enright she founded the website www.aboutthe8th.com which provided questions and answers on the referendum "without argument". The website also had a Twitter and Facebook presence, and in partnership with Lawyers for Choice produced and distributed more than 10,000 leaflets^[25] explaining the legal implications of repeal and the Government’s proposed new legislation. The Centre for Disability Law and Policy at NUI Galway produced an easy read version of the booklet. Her role in the referendum campaign was acknowledged by Minister for Health Simon Harris, Minister for Culture Josepha Madigan, and Kate O’Connell TD in the Dáil.^[26]

Judicial activism and innovation

de Londras is a prominent voice in the debate on the appropriate role of the judiciary within what she calls the ‘constitutionalist ecosystem’.^[27] In the context of Irish constitutional law, she argues that the meaning of constitutional provisions is rarely static or self-evident, so that the task of constitutional interpretation is shared across different branches of government (and, thus, essentially collaborative). However even within that collaborative task, she argued that superior courts have a significant role and can and should be innovative (or what some might call ‘activist’). She lodges this argument in the claim that constitutional governance must constantly address new and emerging issues, so that any system of governance that has a constitutionalist orientation is constantly faced with the task of establishing and assessing the constitutionality of new responses to old and emergent challenges. As a result, she argues that innovative constitutional interpretation is necessary so that the boundaries and limits of constitutionally permissible action can be identified in the face of new and different forms of government activity and governance. This argument was most significantly made out in “In Defence of Judicial Innovation and Constitutional Evolution” in Laura Cahillane, James Gallen & Tom Hickey, Judges, Politics and the Irish Constitution (Manchester University Press, 2016), which Judge Richard Humphreys described as “the best piece in a very good book” in his review of the collection.^[28]

Writing in the context of the European Convention on Human Rights de Londras has made a similar argument around judicial innovation and the evolution of the Convention, arguing that the Court should focus on constitutionalist evolution (over individual justice)^[29] and that in doing so the judges of the Court exercise significant self-restraint.^[30] She has written for a reorientation of the business of the Court away from dealing with large numbers of individual complaints and towards prioritising constitutionalist cases, arguing that non-execution, non-compliance, and persistent rights abuses in areas of legal clarity are a political failure that cannot be addressed by the Court per se but rather require the concerted activity of member states of the ECHR. To this end, she has argued that the infringement procedures under Article 46(4) of the Convention are unlikely to be effective.^[31] Her work on the ECHR has been cited by the Court and the PACE, and in 2018 she published Great Debates on the ECHR with Kanstantsin Dzehtsiarou, her first book on the European Convention on Human Rights.

Counter-terrorism

de Londras is well known for her work on counter-terrorism, constitutionalism, human rights, and the law.

In the context of counter-terrorism law de Londras is known for her argument that judicial oversight is both welcome and effective in attempting to limit effectively the security excesses of government and parliament. In her first major book, Detention in the ‘War on Terror’ (Cambridge University Press, 2011), she argued that in times of terrorism both government and populist urges are in favour of the introduction of measures that tend to be repressive of human rights, but that domestic courts are increasingly pushing back against these measures in order to try to ensure interferences with rights are proportionate. She subsequently defended judicial oversight of counter-terrorism as a necessary counter-weight to political excesses.^[32][33]

In recent years her work has turned more to the governance of counter-terrorism and focused less on the substantive provisions in counter-terrorism law. She ran a major EU-funded project called SECILE to assess the scale of EU counter-terrorism and to analyse the extent to which it might be said to be legitimate, effective and impactful. This resulted in the publication of The Impact, Legitimacy and Effectiveness of EU Counter-Terrorism (Routledge, 2015), co-edited with Josephine Doody. Building on this work de Londras has argued consistently that the processes of making and reviewing EU counter-terrorism law are inadequate and require substantial revision.

In 2017 she was awarded a grant by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust to lead an 18-month project on counter-terrorism review in the UK Archived 20 June 2018 at the Wayback Machine, expanding this governance concern into the domestic realm.^[34] This project resulted in a new book, with Jessie Blackbourn (Durham) and Lydia Morgan (Birmingham), entitled Accountability and Review in the Counter-Terrorist State, published in 2019 by Bristol University Press. In 2022 she published the first comprehensive account of international counter-terrorism law and practice in The Practice and Problems of Transnational Counter-Terrorism (CUP).