James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Very good. I thank the Deputy for that point, which was well made.

We will have a second round of questions if, that is, members have any other questions. We have already had a good and comprehensive engagement. There are 25 minutes remaining. We will have to wrap up then but we may not require that time. I will begin the second round of the questions. There will be some latitude because we have covered many points. We will not stray too far from the agenda but we can touch on wider topics. My question is for both witnesses. I am interested in hearing their responses.

The general scheme relates to judicial appointments and how people get on the Bench. We have had some discussion on how people will move from a lower Bench to a higher Bench, as it were. Aside from the appointment process, I do not think judicial regulation, conduct, management or sanction, if appropriate, come within the scope of the proposed Bill, but I am not sure whether that exists, what format it takes or what process is in place. There are two scenarios where that can unfold. One is what has been documented considerably certainly last year but also occasionally in the past where there has been what was considered to be judicial conduct off the Bench which was considered at times to be not appropriate or the subject of public comment, which certainly did not help anyone's cause. There has been significant comment on that. I hesitate to use the term "judicial misconduct" but there can be scenarios of problematic conduct by individuals on the Bench. I do not mean decisions being made which a Government, a politician or even the public may agree or disagree with. I mean standards of behaviour which, in other contexts, might be seen as workplace bullying. It is very much the exception rather than the rule because the vast majority of academics, all the reports and even practitioners would say that they all perform impeccably. Such issues can arise, however. There are behaviours off the Bench which can be problematic but there are also such behaviours on the Bench. I do not mean in terms of which side a particular judge comes down on but more how they execute that function. It may be the case in any role when one is elevated at a certain point and is not answerable to anyone that bad habits or certain modes of behaviour can creep in which go unchecked for long periods and, in an even worse scenario, be exacerbated. I am not sure whether there is anything in place to temper that. I do not know, for example, whether there is a complaints process or any mode of regulation or mitigation. If not, should there be and what might that look like? Mr. Herrick might respond first and then Mr. Condon.