Results 2,701-2,720 of 18,755 for speaker:Michael McDowell

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: On the previous occasion we were discussing the meaning of section 37, insofar as it disapplies Chapters 1 and 2 of Part 7 of the Bill to a judicial office to which section 44 applies. This means it disapplies the provisions of sections 38 to 43, inclusive, to the offices of Chief Justice, President of the High Court or President of the Court of Appeal. This would be all very well, except...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: I am glad to hear what the Minister has said. The more I have reflected on section 44 and on whether it should be wide or narrow or should apply purely to the Chief Justice, the President of the Court of Appeal and the President of the High Court rather than to ordinary members of those courts, the more convinced I have become of the merits of making the broader case which I have made. I...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: -----from the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court. I am not saying, for reasons of intellectual snobbery or any such reason, that the members should not apply to the judicial appointments commission.It is because nobody should be on one of those courts who is not capable of functioning when invited on the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court. There are not two tiers of Judiciary in the...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: Exactly.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: The legislation would require the candidate to be selected as one of a list of three to be appointed to a vacancy. I believe that the entire High Court is a shortlist for appointment to the Court of Appeal and under the Constitution the entire High Court and the Court of Appeal are the shortlist for appointment to the Supreme Court. We do not need some further evaluation. We do not need...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: Having said all of that, as far as I am concerned, the distinction between section 44 appointments as currently envisaged and other appointments is not valid for the reasons that I have explained. The only distinction I see is between serving members of the superior courts at all three levels who are ex officioqualified to function in the upper two courts and there should be no involvement...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: I move amendment No. 83a:In page 27, line 16, after "Part" to insert ", and notwithstanding the provisions of section 37". This amendment would provide that section 38, effectively, would not be disapplied by section 37. The structure of the Bill, as it currently applies, indicates that section 38 will not apply to senior appointments, whatever they may end up being, under section 44. By...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: It reapplies them.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: I did.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: I agree with Senator Norris that using the word "notwithstanding" is not as clear as simply saying the previous section does not apply to this section at all. The procedures of this House mean that if I were to propose an amendment saying that the previous section does not apply, I would be told that the House had just decided that it does apply and I would be seen to be asking the House to...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: There are a few things that I would like to say to the Minister before the Senator asks for a wider audience.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: If I may say so, the Minister is my audience on this occasion. I agree with the Minister that the positions of Chief Justice, President of the Court of Appeal and President of the High Court are different from the ordinary positions in those courts. That is because the Chief Justice, for instance, has significant other functions, such as chairing the Courts Service, and various other...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: Exactly.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: I remember the late John Patrick Wilson, the former Tánaiste, teaching me Latin in Gonzaga College. The phrase was gladium anceps, a double-edged sword which would go in either direction. The Minister has come here and said suddenly that he wants to take these three positions away from the judicial appointments commission.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: So do I, by the way. Why does he want to do that? I know why I want to do so. I want a rationalisation from the Minister as to why he thinks this group of people would not be a good group to make a shortlist of people for consideration by Government. I will tell the Minister why. It is because he does not really trust them to know the insides and outsides of what is involved in the...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: Yes.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: They do not know enough to make a recommendation, or even draw up a shortlist, as to who should be President of the High Court. Why not? They are skilled when it suits the Minister. These are people who are going to be selected from all sorts of life. They are going to be rushed through by the Public Appointments Service. They are going to be approved by Members of the Oireachtas, but...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: They will be wonderful people. They will have all of the qualifications that are required.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: Diversity and all the rest of it, but when it comes to making a decision of this kind, the Minister is saying no, they are not to have a function in this, that it is a governmental function on which the Government will take advice from senior judges but not from a majority lay body. Where is the reasoning and justification for that distinction? I can see it a mile away. It is that the...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (12 Dec 2018)

Michael McDowell: Sorry, they do not know sufficient to advise the Government or to draw up a shortlist with which the Minister would be happy. That underlines the fact that a lay majority group is not as good, in some circumstances, as a non-lay majority group.