Ivana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Once we have considered them a little more, perhaps.

I wonder about eligibility for the appointment of academics to the District Court and Circuit Court. It seems to be a more appropriate route to the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. I am not, however, wedded to the idea and that is why I am not going to push amendment No. 73 at this stage. I will withdraw it and I may resubmit it for Report Stage.

On amendment No. 75, on substituting "cumulative" for "continuous", the point is important but it could be made in respect of other passages in section 33 as well as line 10 on page 24. I am conscious that "continuous" also appears at line 3 and in subsection (5), at lines 26 and 28. I ask the Minister to consider whether "cumulative" would be preferable to "continuous" in all these cases. I press the point in amendment No. 75 but I am conscious I did not submit amendments in respect of all the references to "continuous" throughout section 33. Therefore, I will come back to this on Report Stage to remedy it if the Minister is not willing to accept the point.

With regard to the substantive point in amendment No. 75, we are suggesting that somebody who has practised as a legal academic for a cumulative period of four years should be eligible. It should not necessarily be a "continuous" period. I am conscious that there may be all sorts of reasons a period of practice might be interrupted — for example, for sabbatical leave spent teaching at an institution abroad, which is very routine and which can be very prestigious and greatly benefit academic research and teaching. It would also benefit the Judiciary. There may be an interruption for reasons associated with childcare and maternity leave, for example. Therefore, the reference to a "continuous" period might be problematic. It would be preferable where the word appears throughout the section to refer instead to "cumulative". That is the substantive point in amendment No. 75.

On amendment No. 76, we are just tightening up the requirement, as Senator Norris pointed out. The amendment seeks the insertion of, "teaches one or more subjects in the field of law", and, "carries out research, or supervises the carrying out of post-graduate research". We are pointing out that it should be postgraduate research. I do not necessarily believe this is the best formulation but we are just trying to put in a reference to postgraduate research.

Amendment No. 77 proposes to change the definition of "university" to which the phrase "educational establishment" applies. Again, I will consider this for Report Stage.

Let me refer to Senators' point on the head of faculty. Senator Ó Domhnaill addresses this in amendment No. 74. As others have said, the language in the legislation is somewhat problematic. In Trinity, for example, we have a law school and a faculty of arts, humanities and social sciences. The head of law is the head of law and not a dean of a faculty or anything like that. I am conscious that the proposed subsection (7) states any reference to the head of faculty shall be construed as a reference to the dean, etc. That deals with the point. I am not quite sure why section 33 refers so much to "head of faculty" in any case. That is the more substantive point. The reference seems quite specific. There are so few law schools in Ireland and so few heads of faculty that it almost sounds somewhat personalised. That is why there is a slight concern.