Seanad debates

Wednesday, 14 November 2018

Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

10:30 am

Photo of Charles FlanaganCharles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Lest it be said that I did not respond to the Senators who made a contribution today, I will say exactly what I said on the previous occasion in response to the same issues as have been raised by Senator Bacik and other Senators. My advice is that this Bill, including the confidentiality aspects of both sections 27 and 28, has no implications for the exercise by the Attorney General of his or her advisory role under the Constitution. I disagree with the assertion of Senator Bacik, if I interpret it correctly, that the involvement of the Attorney General on the commission or, as currently, on the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board is a political involvement. I am not going to get involved in what is or is not an issue of Cabinet confidentiality.As I said on the last occasion, as a member of the commission the Attorney General must be mindful of section 27 and confidential information. I am not going to get involved in a debate on Cabinet confidentiality, nor will I be drawn into a debate on what does or does not come under the doctrine of Cabinet collective responsibility. Senator Bacik is right. After the last occasion when the issue was raised by Senators here I reverted for further legal advice, and my advice is the same. The Attorney General will be bound by both section 27, as amended, and section 28.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.