Seán Haughey (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the three speakers for their presentations this morning. Dr. Fennelly spoke about the Pringle case and the alienation of sovereignty as opposed to the exercise of sovereignty. The International Criminal Court had to go to referendum. Without making any reference to the High Court case, what is the view of the witness on the unified patent court?

Does Dr. Fennelly think that needs to go to a referendum, constitutionally and legally? Second, could he give us other examples of where Ireland has signed up to similar systems? One case was mentioned in the briefing material concerning the World Trade Organization's energy charter treaty. Could he give some examples off the top of his head where we have signed up to something similar without the need for a referendum?

I have two quick questions for Dr. Ankersmit. There was some reference to side-stepping domestic courts. Is he categorically saying that is possible and that domestic courts have no role to play in disputes like this or is that open to question?

My second question is a technical one that came up at our meeting last week. It relates to the appointment of judges to the investor court system. Will the system be objective, in so far as it can be? Is the system of appointment open, transparent and accountable or is it political? Could Dr. Ankersmit give any insight into how trustworthy or objective the institution at the centre of the investor court system can be, given the appointment of judges and so forth?