Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

This Bill provides for the establishment of a new court of appeal. A referendum is required to make the necessary constitutional provision for the establishment of such a court.

If the referendum is passed, the new court of appeal will hear appeals from the High Court, and the Supreme Court will hear cases on appeal from the court of appeal and, in exceptional circumstances, from the High Court. This reform would, as we all know, bring about a major change in the courts system and ease the four-year backlog of cases at the Supreme Court, which would in future take only appeals on constitutional issues or cases of major importance. Sinn Féin supports this legislation and the proposition that the question be put to the people.

We are currently in a situation where some very important cases of a constitutional nature are waiting a number of years to be heard. I firmly believe this should not be the case. I welcome the idea behind the legislation before us which seeks to resolve this issue. Unfortunately, the Bill does not specify the number of judges who will sit on the new court and we are told that this and the age of retirement, pension conditions and remuneration will all be set out later in legislation.

I want to take the opportunity to speak briefly on the issue of judicial appointments. We have had opportunities to engage on this in the past, but I would like to add to what has been said. As the Minister knows, I launched the Reform of Judicial Appointments Procedures Bill earlier this year. I did so in the hope that this would put an end to the system of political appointees being made judges. This should not rule out people who have been involved in politics. It is healthy for citizens to be involved in politics, but we would like more accountability in terms of the process. Our Bill would amend the way in which the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board operates in order to increase transparency and accountability in judicial appointments, a reform which is badly needed.

Confidence in the justice system is contingent on a Judiciary which is free from political control or political or other bias and it is essential that there is an independent and impartial Judiciary which is representative of the community it serves. I appreciate there have been excellent articles on the eight current judges who sit on the Supreme Court, including the Chief Justice, in the press recently. When we look at their respective CVs, we see they are people of eminent qualifications. However, sadly, when people are appointed politically, this leaves an impression we need to deal with. We cannot have a situation where there are questions regarding the appointment of people who love the law, are extremely talented and are committed to the service of the people because of the process of their appointment.

Future judicial appointments should be drawn from a wider pool of qualified candidates, which in turn would enhance confidence in the justice system. For too long, throughout the length and breadth of the State, we have all been aware of stories relating how judges were appointed with a wink and nod after demonstrating their loyalty to either Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, the Labour Party, the Progressive Democrats or whoever. The days of the old boys' club, which dominated the legal and political spheres in Ireland, must come to an end. They have failed our people. The practice of the Government appointing judges, senior judges in particular, must be ended if the public is to have any faith in a Judiciary free from political or any other bias. The sheer number of judges appointed politically adds to an already embedded and unfortunate public perception of the Judiciary. We in Sinn Féin call for the establishment of a fair and accountable appointment and removal process for the Judiciary that involves meaningful lay participation representative of the public interest. We believe that judicial independence is undermined by the current appointment process in the 26 counties.

The Judicial Appointments Advisory Board was established in the wake of the controversial appointment of Harry Whelehan as President of the High Court in 1994 and was meant to have removed sole discretion for judicial appointments from government. However, there is still political involvement in the appointment of the Judiciary as the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board merely provides a short list of seven qualified candidates to the Government, which then makes the appointments of judicial officeholders. The appointment procedures should be transparent in order to enhance public confidence in the process. The current Government promised to be a reforming government and to put an end to the "jobs for the boys" culture but, looking at its appointments so far, it is clear a number of them are of people associated with the Fine Gael and Labour Parties. This is unfortunate.

I also want to speak about the need for a judicial council and the capacity for people to raise their concerns. We need full accountability. The majority of people in the Judiciary who have served the State down through the years were people who were eminently qualified and who had every right to be where they were. They have given considerable service to the State, particularly those at the higher end. Consider, for example the eight current members of the Supreme Court. I have no doubt they are all eminently qualified and love the law and the work they do. However, we need to put an end to the current process of selection. Our Bill provides for this. I know the Minister has concerns, but the Bill can be amended and tweaked. We need to get to a point where we have a small shortlist, preferably a list of three, from the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board. The list should outline the reasons for their selection and the Government could then outline the reason for an appointment. This process must be set out in a way that can be shaped, argued and debated. There must be no question mark over the appointment of a member of the Judiciary so that they remain and are bona fide genuinely independent.

Another issue is that the Supreme Court decides on matters of constitutional importance. Therefore, we need a balance in the Supreme Court of people from different perspectives. To understand the need for balance, all we need to do is to listen to the debate that took place in this House till 5 a.m. This House of 166 Deputies is representative of Irish society. Participants in the debate were people from the left and people from the right, people who are liberal and people who are conservative. We need the Supreme Court to be genuinely representative of all political perspectives in the State. That is why it is important that the appointments are independent and strike the right balance, particularly given the powers these judges have in terms of the Constitution and its interpretation and in terms of holding governments to account.

Access to the courts and to justice is a constitutional right, yet the expense of these can run into extremely high figures, thereby acting as a barrier to people seeking to exercise this right. We know that if cases move faster, the chances of reducing costs are better.

Another point I want to raise concerns the referendum. We have put dozens of referendums to the people of the State over the years, some with greater success than others. The Constitution belongs to the citizens of the State and they reserve the right to change it as they see fit. We owe it to the people to do this in an appropriate fashion. We need to ensure that when this eventually goes to the people, they understand exactly what they are being asked to vote on. We need to explain the question in as clear a way as possible and explain both sides of the argument in a clear, balanced and open fashion.

The plan envisages that the new court of appeal will deal with most cases that are currently dealt with by the Supreme Court, which would therefore reduce the higher court's workload and allow it to focus on the development of the law. There are to be two tests to decide what types of appeal the Supreme Court will hear: the first is public importance, and the second is where it is in the interests of justice that the appeal by heard by the highest court in the State. In exceptional circumstances, where these tests of public interest and the interests of justice are met, the Supreme Court will be able to hear appeals directly from the High Court.

The Supreme Court in Ireland, unlike equivalent institutions in other common law jurisdictions, is the court of final appeal, not only for constitutional matters but for all appeals from the lower courts. Figures published this week by the Courts Service show that the court received 605 appeals last year, a 21% increase on 2011. It gave judgments in 121 cases, compared to 64 in the United States Supreme Court and 85 in the Supreme Court in London.

It is important to welcome the creation of a new court, where proceedings take place within a reasonable time, as an inefficient court system is costly. Runaway legal costs must be tackled. I commend the reform efforts being made in the context of the debate on the Courts and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, the Second Stage debate of which will take place tomorrow. This Bill includes some very important and welcome reforms. This is good governance and we need more of the same. I also applaud the Minister on his concept of a separate family law system.

Many exciting announcements have been made in the past few weeks. Credit where credit is due. My job is to oppose and hold to account, but it is also to acknowledge when things are moving well. Let us have the backlog in the Attorney General's office addressed, if we can. Good legislation needs to move quickly. We need to get the Legal Services Regulation Bill moving in the autumn as the delays have been very frustrating. While we may not agree on all the changes the Minister seeks to bring forward, we will probably agree on more than we disagree on. There are many exciting developments on the way in the reform of the courts system and its efficiency. I hope we can have the judicial appointments issue addressed and I will work with the Minister in the next few years to develop that debate.

This measure is welcome and we will support it. While we need to talk about the wider reforms that need to happen in the Judiciary, there are many welcome developments. I offer my support to the Bill and ask the Minister to take on board some of the concerns I have highlighted.

See this speech in context