Results 15,921-15,940 of 18,761 for speaker:Michael McDowell

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: I have said most of what I wanted to say about the whole question of the sitting Judiciary being required to apply to a body which is not the Government for consideration to be appointed to positions in the Supreme Court or Court of Appeal or to the presidencies of those courts. I will ask the Minister a simple, factual question. As I understood it, a procedure was recently put in place...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: It is appointment to a more senior position.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: I am grateful to the Minister for saying as much as he did, but I wanted to know whether the procedure for signifying willingness would continue or be prohibited?

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: That is the point. The only channel of communication for an ordinary judge of the High Court to the Government will be via the judicial appointments commission.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: I am teasing it out, but if that is the case, it means what I said on other occasions about other amendments must certainly be true in this instance. The Government will effectively be kept in the dark on the sitting judges who are willing to serve in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court. The Minister is effectively saying it will be unlawful for anybody to communicate his or her...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: I believe that is unconstitutional, but it is a contrived opinion of mine. To me, there is absolutely no excuse. Senator Bacik has just arrived in the Chamber.For her information, I point out that the Minister has clarified that once the Bill comes into operation, it will be prohibited for a member of the Judiciary to communicate to the Government his or her willingness to accept promotion...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: Such a judge would not even have any means to communicate to the Government his or her wish to be appointed. It is strange that the Supreme Court could function with one or more members of the High Court sitting on the bench and yet a group of people other than the Government-----

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: -----can censor the fact a judge of the High Court has applied to become a member of the Supreme Court but been found unsuitable for that position. How can the commission be permitted to deliberately keep the Government in the dark in that regard? There is another issue of which I wish to remind the Minister.We were told in Part 2, at section 7, that the decision to recommend a person for...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: I agree with the Minister in one respect, namely, that this is the logic of the positions he has successively adopted in the course of the Second Stage debate and the Committee Stage debate. This is the logic of his position but it must be clearly understood. If this Bill goes to the Supreme Court under Article 26 of the Constitution, it must be clear what the Minister intends, in case...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: No. If we enact this law, it will be unlawful for anybody to tell the Government the names of the judges who wished to be considered by the Government for appointment but who were forced into the judicial appointments process and left off the shortlist that goes to the Cabinet. There could not be anything starker as an unconstitutional proposition than that. With the original Judicial...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: It depends on his or her behaviour.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: They will be in a minority at every stage.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: The more I hear about this the more alarming I find it. First, let us deal with the invitation the Minister gave me, which was to indicate that his senior appointments committee would be better than what we have here. I am very loath to do so because, if he simply brought us back to the position at which this Bill had us in the Dáil, it would still be unconstitutional for the reasons I...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: The appointment of an ordinary member of the Supreme Court, whether it is a man or woman, is of major importance. We only have to look to America. It was not the appointment of a chief justice that caused President Trump to get into such a state of high excitement but rather the appointment of an ordinary member because he was affecting the complexion or balance within the court. This...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: I move amendment No. 79:In page 26, to delete lines 12 to 16 and substitute the following: "(a) the provisions of the Act of 1961 as amended relating to qualification for appointment as an ordinary judge of the High Court including section 45A of the Act of 1961 (as inserted by section 33(4)),".

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: I move amendment No. 80:In page 26, line 27, to delete "The Commission" and substitute "Without prejudice to section 7, the Commission".

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: A number of aspects are becoming clearer as the discussion goes further. Section 36 is in Part 6, Chapter 2 of the Bill.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: I just want to be clear. The confusion seems to lie entirely in the drafting of this legislation. This section states:(1) The Commission shall not recommend the name of a person to the Minister unless the person—(a) has displayed—(i) in the case of a barrister or solicitor referred to in subsection (2), in his or her practice as a barrister or solicitor, as the case may be, a...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: Yes, and a degree of competence when the person was a barrister. These are the kinds of things the commission does not take into account when appointing a Chief Justice, President of the Court of Appeal or President of the High Court. It is very reassuring that these positions are now to be filled by people who have not been vetted on their competence, character, health, temperament or...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Nov 2018)

Michael McDowell: When sections 34 and 36 are combined, the commission, which for most judicial appointments is supposed to look at suitability on grounds of character, temperament, competence, probity and suitability on grounds of health, is not to do this for the three most senior appointments in the land. I cannot understand how that could possibly make sense. I do not understand why we have this...