Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Deputy Clare Daly is correct in saying that the process should be transparent. It is transparent, however. When somebody makes an application for bail, it is done in an open court where the public can hear it. The judge makes a decision at the end of it and that decision is generally given on an ex temporebasis - the judge just speaks out the judgment.

As there is a digital audio recording in every court, it is possible to get a record of what was said by a judge at the time. My only concern about the amendment is that it would mean that if I make a bail application to a judge for someone, the Garda will presumably oppose it, and then I have to say to the judge: "By the way, before you make a decision, I want you to know that that decision has to be in writing." That will happen, meaning that the application will have to be adjourned and the applicant will continue to be remanded in custody until there is a decision. It will take time for that decision to be put down in writing.

I understand the objective of Deputies Jonathan O'Brien and Clare Daly is to build up a body of case law so that people can look to see if judges are consistent in how they apply this. I believe that can be achieved, perhaps by the Department of Justice and Equality working on having automatic transcription of the digital audio recording so that decisions can be provided. If we apply the process in the amendment where an applicant applies for it to be in writing, the applicant will suffer and will have to wait for another two weeks for the judge to come up with the written decision.

See this speech in context