Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

There has been an enormous amount of talk about this particular Bill. Certainly any changes to any part of our liberal democracy need to be made in a measured, thoughtful and educated manner, but this Bill is extremely limited in its scope. While it is flawed in places, it only makes marginal improvements to the system.

No one in this State should be immune from analysis or constructive criticism. All of us, whether we are on the Supreme Court or walking the streets of Dublin, are equal citizens of this State. Obviously the legislative branch of the State has a responsibility to discuss the Judiciary in a fair and measured manner, but if we have learned anything from the last 50 years, it is that undue deference is the enemy of critical analysis. No one should be immune from respectful, decent critical analysis, no matter what role he or she plays in the State. It is interesting that this week Fianna Fáil is on its high horse about critical analysis of the Judiciary when it spent all last week criticising, in a personal way, one individual judge for its own political reasons.

The cornerstone of a functioning democratic justice system is an independent and impartial Judiciary which is representative of the community as a whole. That last phrase, "representative of the community as a whole", is critically important. Political parties, and none more than my own, have spent a good deal of time in recent years making sure that elected representatives are truly representative of the communities they serve. Indeed, legislation was passed by the previous Dáil to make sure that we have far more representative levels of people standing for election. There is a flowering of diversity in this State at the moment. Very few, if any, Members of this House would argue that this diversity is not a developing strength of this State, but it is not reflected in many organs and branches of the State. It is certainly not reflected in the Judiciary, and as a result, it is fair to say that the Judiciary is out of sync with the people it currently serves.

Every system within the State is dependent upon its inputs. Our own systems, for example, are dependent on our inputs.

Our physical systems are dependent upon the diversity of food we eat and are healthier as a result of that diversity. Our minds are healthier if inputted with a large diverse element of thought and influence. If the inputs of a system are made up of the system itself, it is very difficult to introduce change. However, if the inputs have diverse origins, there is no doubt that after a while the system will start to reflect those origins.

We are strongly of the view that there needs to be a step-change regarding the diversity of our State, Legislature and Judiciary. It is clear that this will not happen under the current system. The system from which it originated does not have the necessary inputs. Change will only happen if we inject more diversity into the appointments process. Over the years, there has been a fair amount of unease among the general public regarding the level of political influence and control over this process. That is a logical concern.

We live in a State that has been cursed with political nepotism throughout most of its sectors. The political machines of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Labour Party have, in reality, been built over the years on the basis of political leftism. In many ways, nepotism was created in order to repay those who put their shoulder to the wheel and contributed to the growth of those political organisations. Political nepotism is also designed for another purpose, namely, seeking to ensure that the agendas of the political operators exist in those spheres long after Governments have lost office. It is a way of controlling the development of any sector of society long after people have left office. In America, we see that in the most obvious fashion whereby presidents rejoice at the opportunity to name Supreme Court judges because they can orientate the court to a particular view for 20, 30 or 40 years. We have a responsibility to eradicate this influence from all sectors of our society. We should use every opportunity to do so, and this is such an opportunity

Tá sé rí-thábhachtach go mbeadh muinín ag an bpobal as na breithiúna, go bhfuil lucht an dlí neamhchlaonta, fuarchuasach, fairáilte, agus go n-ainmnítear iad sa mhodh céanna. Is daoine daonna iad na breithiúna, na habhcóidí agus na dlíodóirí agus is cinnte go ndéantar cinntí atá claonta agus comhghleacaithe i gceannas ar phróiseas ainmniúcháin. Is gá go mbeadh córas i bhfeidhm a laghdaíonn an tionchar polaitiúil agus an tionchar pearsanta maidir le ceapacháin bhreithiúna.

It is also interesting to identify the origin of most of the resistance to this particular change. The champions of the status quoat this stage seem to be those who are themselves on the inside. Based on media comments, one would swear that the expertise of the Judiciary is being deleted from this process. That is not the case. The Judiciary and the legal profession will still have a significant role in respect of the development of the process. We have an opportunity to inject diversity of thought and influence in a big way into the process. We should grasp that.

Tá an páirtí i bhfabhar an Bille seo, ach tá fadhbanna leis gan dabht. Ní aontaíonn muid leis an tslí atá sé á gcur tríd na Dála, agus an deifir atá leis. Is muid ag caint maidir le rudaí mar seo, ba cheart go mbeimis ag díriú ar na mionsonraí ionas nach mbeimid ag filleadh chun an Tí sna blianta atá romhainn de thairbhe na deifre sin. Bí cinnte de go mbeidh mo chomhleacaí, Deputy Jonathan O’Brien, ag iarraidh athruithe a chur leis an bpróiseas ionas go mbeidh Bille i bhfad níos fearr againn. Ba cheart go mbeadh smaointe na ndaoine – diversity na daoine – i lár an phróisis.

See this speech in context