Dáil debates

Thursday, 26 November 2020

Judicial Appointments Process: Statements

 

2:30 pm

Photo of Catherine ConnollyCatherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome this opportunity to participate in the debate. I would like to think it is the start of a bright light shining on the opaqueness of our appointments system for the Judiciary.

I believe the Minister for Justice has been handed a hospital pass. That phrase has already been used by Deputy Catherine Murphy. In a previous life, while we were delighted to get a hospital pass as barristers, we knew exactly what it meant. I believe what has landed on the Minister's lap is a hospital pass.

It is regrettable that it has taken this much effort to have this limited debate in this manner. I put the blame squarely on the Taoiseach. I am afraid he has learned nothing.

Earlier this week, we considered the lobbying Bill brought forward by Sinn Féin. I had read the Standards in Public Office Commission reports. I asked myself why we must rely on the Opposition to bring changes. Fair play to Sinn Féin for bringing forward that Bill. SIPO has told us repeatedly what changes were needed, yet in January of this year the former Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform told us no changes were necessary. It has taken all the scandals to date and the revolving door, plus the initiative from Sinn Féin, to force some type of change. Even then, the Government said it needed nine months.

It is similar with this. Why do I mention it? It is because I looked back. I thank some parts of the media for their work on this story. Without them, we would have little information. Certainly, we would have none if we were reliant on the Government. The Government has told us it has done nothing wrong and has complied with the procedures. The procedures have been totally opaque because no one knows how they work.

Let us consider the words of the former Chief Justice, Ms Susan Denham, who retired in 2017. She said many interesting things in her farewell speech. She talked about the lacunae and the necessity for change. She said:

This lacuna is so in spite of many years of discussions on the topic. I first discussed the matter with the minister for justice, Nora Owen, in 1997...

She referred to what was needed in terms of legislation, training for judges, a more transparent system for appointments and so on. She also referred to the Council of Europe and GRECO, which has been referred to many times. In 2014, she referred to a 2007 GRECO report that made five recommendations, namely, that a judicial council be established; that the system for appointing judges be reviewed; that a special pay and conditions body be established for the Judiciary; that a code of conduct for judges be formally established; and that a dedicated training institution for judges be established. She said in 2017 that, notwithstanding the fact that those recommendations had been made by the Council of Europe or a body acting under its aegis, not one recommendation had been acted upon. This was the Judiciary asking for change. GRECO has continued to publish interim compliance reports and other reports and it is still unhappy with the rate of change in Ireland.

I disagree with the comments of Deputy Bríd Smith, although mostly I agree with her. I believe it is remarkable that the Judiciary has been independent. Indeed, I remember Mr. Justice Niall McCarthy, now deceased. He stands out. He tried to hold the Government to account in respect of the amendment to the Constitution relating to abortion. The former Justice, Mr. Peter Kelly, also stands out among many other judges. I am not here to make any apology for judges but their independence is remarkable. In my moments of despair with this institution, the Health Service Executive and many other institutions, the Judiciary stands out for me as the last bastion for an ordinary person on occasions. The greatest problem of course is that most people do not have access to the courts because the process is far too expensive. I wish that is what we were talking about today.

I would call the Minister's speech today disjunctive. I do not believe the paragraphs follow from each other and I believe the Minister is in a difficult position. I believe the Taoiseach should be before the House answering these questions today and setting out what has happened. He was well able to speak on the last occasion Fine Gael and the Labour Party allowed the then Attorney General to go to the Court of Appeal. He called it an insider job that stank to the high heavens.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.