Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin North Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

The purpose of the proposed new sections is to amend the law relating to judicial appointments but with only one dimension of the law considered, that is, making legal academics eligible for appointment as judges of all courts by extending to them the qualifying and eligibility provisions which currently apply to practising barristers and solicitors. Effectively, the amendments would equate a legal academic with barristers and solicitors who, subject to having the relevant practice experience, are eligible for appointment to all courts.

The first amendment defines a "qualifying legal academic" as a member of the academic staff at the King's Inns, the Law Society, universities and other legal training institutions. The second amendment would make such legal academics eligible for appointment to the High Court, the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court. The third amendment would make them eligible for appointment as temporary judges. The fourth would make them eligible for appointment to the Circuit Court; the fifth would make the same provision in respect of the District Court, while the sixth would have the effect of including such legal academics among those whom the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board may consider suitable as persons whose names could be submitted by it to the Minister under the appointments procedures set out under the Courts and Court Officers Act 1995.

The amendments, given that they deal with appointments as judges, are outside the scope of the Bill. The Government is conducting a wide-ranging review of all matters concerned with judicial appointments that will allow the necessary full assessment of all aspects of the issue. It is committed to bringing forward legislative reforms in this area and a judicial appointments Bill which is being prepared is the subject of a commitment in the agreed programme for Government. The subject of the amendments, that is, the eligibility of legal academics for judicial appointment, is one of a wide range of matters included within the scope of the review I have mentioned.Legislation in this area that might have regard to only one aspect of eligibility for judicial appointment is unlikely to complement the overall reform process needed in the area, which is balanced and considered, and which, as I have mentioned, the Government proposes to bring forward as soon as practicable. The question of appointing academic lawyers is not new. From time to time, calls have been made to tap into the deep academic experience and knowledge of professors of law and similar. Often, these are persons with a great level of expertise in particular areas of the law or who research the law extensively. They teach the subject and, in some cases, they have authored legal texts and engaged in public discourse on matters relating to the law. I am confident the merits or otherwise of such a measure will be fully explored in the context of the judicial appointments review I have mentioned. It was understood on launching the review and the public consultations that it would be worthwhile to consider opening up the eligibility criteria for appointment as a judge, perhaps in so far as the experience of academic lawyers is concerned, but perhaps also to reflect the depth of experience in other areas where great legal expertise is evident without the required practice experience.

The consultation process last year reflected the fact the appointments system, including the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, while a model of best practice in its day needed reviewing almost 20 years after its establishment. Arising from the consultation process, draft legislative provisions to reform and update the judicial appointment procedures are being prepared by the Department, as such legislation is part of the agreed programme for Government. The Minister has indicated that reforms will be brought forward in 2016.

On this basis I ask the Senator to withdraw his amendment in favour of fully comprehensive reform of the law in the area of judicial appointments, as the amendment is outside the scope of the Bill. I undertake to refer the Senator's amendment to the Department for inclusion as a matter for consideration in the work of the review I have mentioned.