Dáil debates

Friday, 6 June 2014

Reform of Judicial Appointments Procedures Bill 2013: Second Stage [Private Members]

 

12:20 pm

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

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

The Reform of Judicial Appointments Procedures Bill 2013 was published in January last year and it seeks to increase transparency and accountability in judicial appointments. Confidence in the justice system is contingent on a Judiciary which is free from political control and political or other bias. It is essential that there is an independent and impartial Judiciary which is representative of the community it serves. I acknowledge that the overwhelming majority, if not all, of the members of the Judiciary who have served down through the years see themselves in that light. Although I appreciate that, because of the way we have carried out the appointments, it has left the perception of political appointment, which is very unfortunate and must end.

A truly representative Judiciary would enhance confidence in the justice system and promote the development of a non-partisan Judiciary and a culture of judicial independence. Future judicial appointments should be drawn from a wide pool of qualified candidates that fully represent the community as a key step towards the eradication of the corrosive and unaccountable system of patronage. We must not allow a "jobs for the boys and girls" attitude to permeate something so fundamentally important as the administration of justice in the State. As well as increasing transparency and accountability in the appointment of judges, we also want a judicial council and complaints body that will hold judges to account, along with a code of ethics by which they should abide. This Government should be the last to make political appointments to the Judiciary.

We would like to see a sentencing council based on the system in England and Wales, with clear sentencing guidelines given to the Judiciary. I admire the system in place in England and Wales, as it has engagement with the public about what are appropriate sentences for particular categories of criminal offences. On the basis of what is agreed, guidelines are passed to the Judiciary. It is quite a flexible framework and judges still have a degree of discretion according to the circumstances of the individual case, although judges are expected to record the reasons for their decision regarding the sentencing for an offence. I hope the system will be implemented in Ireland.

I understand the judicial council Bill is on the way and when the time arises, on behalf of my party I will submit detailed amendments incorporating a sentencing council into the judicial council framework. I have been advised by a number of non-governmental organisations that this is the best way to proceed, although I had intended to submit a sentencing council Private Members' Bill in order to implement the model in Ireland. We want a position where the perception of political appointments to the Judiciary can be brought to an end. We can then clearly state that this is an independent and accountable system, with sentences and practices that are equally accountable. We hope to get that in the next few years through legislation.

When we published the Bill last year it was part of Sinn Féin's campaign to end the political cronyism that had been embedded - some would argue it is still there - in Irish society. For too long we have all been aware of stories from across the State of judges being appointed after their loyalty has been demonstrated to Government parties. The days of the old boys and girls club which has dominated the legal and political spheres in Ireland must come to an end. An investigation by Ms Dearbhail McDonald of the Irish Independentin November 2011 highlighted that a third of the country's judges had personal or political connections to political parties before being appointed to the Bench. Of the 168 judicial appointments made since 1995, 56 had such connections, and they were appointed after the introduction of the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, JAAB, an agency designed to take judicial nominations out of the political arena. In the majority of cases, the judge's links were to one or other of the parties who were in Government at the time the appointment was made, and in other cases, the judges were relatives of leading political figures.

Sinn Fein believes judicial independence is undermined by the current appointment process in this State. The JAAB was established in the wake of the controversial appointment of Harry Whelehan as President of the High Court in 1994 and was meant to remove sole discretion for judicial appointments from Government. However, there is still too much political involvement in the appointment of the Judiciary as the JAAB merely provides a list of seven qualified candidates to the Government, which in turn make the appointments of judicial office holders.

Sinn Fein believes that there should be as little political involvement in the appointments process as possible. We have proposed in our Bill to make the following changes to the constitution of the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board. The chair of the Irish Human Rights Commission shall be the chairperson of the board. Other members will include the Chief Justice, the President of the High Court, the President of the Circuit Court, the President of the District Court and the Attorney General. The board would also include a practising barrister who shall be nominated by the chairman for the time being of the Council of the Bar of Ireland; a practising solicitor who shall be nominated by the president for the time being of the Law Society of Ireland; and not more than four persons appointed by the Minister who shall be persons engaged in, or having knowledge or experience that the Minister considers appropriate of commerce, finance, administration or persons who have experience as consumers of the services provided by the courts that the Minister considers appropriate.

It is notable that the number of lay representatives on the board is increased from three to four in order to ensure there is meaningful lay representation, in keeping with the equivalent obligations under the Good Friday Agreement. We have also sought to define the criteria for appointments more fully as what we have is somewhat ill-defined and overly subjective. Sinn Féin believes the criteria must be transparently meritocratic.

Section 10 of the Sinn Féin Bill also obliges the Government to make public the reasons for appointing an individual to a position within the Judiciary. Key to all our considerations in drafting the Bill were transparency and the restoration of public confidence in the system. We have moved from the model of a short list of seven to one of three.

I recognise the work of the judicial appointments review committee led by the Chief Justice, Ms Susan Denham. This was a very important contribution. At the end of last January she spoke out on behalf of that committee. The judges want a new system of judicial appointment. She called on the Government to de-politicise Ireland’s unsatisfactory, to use her word, judicial appointments process and to introduce new laws to ensure judges are appointed on merit. She also called for the establishment of an independent judicial council to oversee issues such as appointments, pay talks, complaints about judges and judicial education, warning that the absence of such a body is causing great damage.

She went on to say political allegiance should have no bearing on appointments to judicial office. The committee's proposals for a remedy to the perception of political appointments are identical to those in my Bill. It calls for a short list of three and for the reasons for an appointment to be given clearly. Everybody in this House agrees that Ms Justice Susan Denham is one of the most respected members of the Judiciary.

I accept that there is no question about the independence of the overwhelming majority of judges. Having an allegiance to, being a member of, or adviser to, a political party, should not exclude one from holding judicial office because people should be active in political life and are entitled to pursue political interests in their early life. There needs to be a clear, published meritocracy in the appointment process. There should be no question that any member of the Judiciary is appointed because of his or her political allegiances. That is the challenge we face. The Judiciary wants this to happen, as does the public. If the Government has the will we can achieve that.

I lean on the findings of the judicial appointments review committee and the intervention by one of the most respected members of the Judiciary, the Chief Justice Ms Susan Denham. I have submitted this Bill as part of the Government review of this process. The Chief Justice's comments were almost identical to our suggestion. When I and my colleagues in Sinn Féin drafted this Bill we consulted with people who have much more wisdom in these matters to reach a model that struck the right balance. I hope the Government will support the progress of this Bill to Committee Stage where it can amend it, if it has issues with it. If the Government supports the Bill today that would send a clear signal that the Government is ready for change and will engage in that process.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.