David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 83:

In page 41, line 4, to delete “otherwise than in public” and substitute the following:“in public save:

(a) where the Adjudication Officer considers it appropriate to hear the matter otherwise than in public; or

(b) where both of the parties agree that it shall be heard in private”.

I see that amendment No. 98 is a Government amendment. The Government is going a certain way towards meeting the intentions of our amendment. I welcome that. The Bill as it stands states, "Proceedings under this section before an adjudication officer shall be conducted otherwise than in public". In other words, it will be conducted in private. There is an argument that proceedings should be in public for the information of the public and for the ventilation of the serious issues involved. There is also an argument that the parties involved should be in a position to consent to having them heard in public. There is a balance between public and private here. Significant issues of justice may be dealt with by an adjudication officer, so it is important that there is potential for these to be heard in public. The public is entitled to see the administration of justice and to understand the issues involved.It is suggested it is best that the parties have an input into whether a hearing is held in public. That means that there is a certain amount of agreement, in that the contending parties agree that this is an important matter that must be ventilated in public and, therefore, give their consent, whereas, in general, the legislation suggests it be held in private. In this instance, the amendment holds that it should be held in public. It states it should be held in public save "where the Adjudication Officer considers it appropriate to hear the matter otherwise than in public". In other words, it is the responsibility of the adjudication officer. The second qualification is when both parties agree or, in other words, where there is consent. It is welcome that in amendment No. 98 the Minister goes some way towards meeting the intention of the amendments and I would be interested to hear him elaborate further on this issue.