Dáil debates

Thursday, 2 May 2013

Ceisteanna - Questions - Priority Questions

Judicial Appointments

5:00 pm

Photo of Alan ShatterAlan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Again, it is important that we do not raise questions over the independence of any member of the Judiciary, regardless of which Government has made the appointment. I wish to assure the Deputy, despite what I read in the newspapers, that every judicial appointment made by this Government has been made on merit, and I can say that categorically. There was an interesting survey done by a journalist working for the Independent News & Media group which carried a headline to the effect that one third of judicial appointments over a period of years were of individuals who had some connection with democratic politics. Of course, the headline was not to the effect that two thirds of them had no such connection. Activist lawyers who are interested in social and political issues and in law reform will frequently engage with political parties of different political persuasions so that areas of law badly in need of reform are highlighted and they can contribute to the legislative process. That is and should be welcome.

I have some difficulties with the Bill proposed by the Deputy. It is important that appointments are made in a manner that is independent and the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, JAAB, criteria are currently specified in statutory provisions. The Deputy's Bill seeks to amend those statutory provisions slightly to provide that additional requirements can be contained in guidelines published by the Minister. If the Minister could direct the JAAB through guidelines, outside of a decision of the Houses of the Oireachtas, as to how it should approach an individual judicial appointment, we would hear howls about an attempt by the Minister to interfere in the independence of the Judiciary. That is an issue of concern.

In the wider public debate, an interesting issue arises in the context of judicial appointments, namely that judicial appointments in this State are confined to practising barristers and solicitors. In other jurisdictions they are not so confined. In the United States of America, for example, some of the leading members of the Supreme Court came from academia. Is that something we should consider? Should we, for example, ask professional bodies such as the Bar Council or the Law Library to provide professional courses for those who would at some future date seek to be appointed to the Judiciary, so that there is some form of training in advance of such appointments? These are issues that should be part of the public debate, although I am conscious that there are differing views on them.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.