Seanad debates

Wednesday, 21 November 2018

Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

10:30 am

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I appreciate that the Minister has indicated a degree of openness of mind on this issue. It is clearly understandable in the context that he ended up leaving the Dáil with a provision in this respect with which he did not enter the Dáil.

Subsection (8) of our proposed section 44 refers to the committee constituted by the section for all senior promotional appointments within the superior courts:

The Committee shall as soon as practicable make a report to the Government when requested by the Minister in accordance with subsection (2), and shall include in its report—

(a) the names of such persons as have expressed an interest in appointment to the judicial office mentioned in subsection (2), and

(b) the names of any such person or persons (not exceeding three in any case) whom the Committee recommends for such appointment.

Subsection (9) of the proposed new section states: "In advising the President in relation to the appointment of a person to a judicial office to which this section applies, the Government shall first consider for appointment those persons whose names have been recommended to the Government by the Committee in a report furnished to the Government under the provisions of this section." This was, and is, an effort to create visibility for the Government regarding what it is doing in the context of a senior appointment. First, it re-enacts the JAAB procedure whereby the Government should first consider the recommended list. That is probably as close as one can sail to the constitutional wind in asking the Government to pay attention to the report of the body. What we have in mind is that the names of persons who have expressed an interest should be the subject of knowledge of the Cabinet.

Let me make a point that I do not believe is widely understood. On a good day, if everybody became enthusiastic, a large number of people - perhaps 30 to 60 - could express an interest in being appointed as an ordinary member of the High Court. My experience was that when vacancies in the Supreme Court were advertised, the number of practitioners who expressed an interest was tiny. They were countable on one hand, or none. Few people would waste their time filling out the forms unless they were serious contenders. Of course, a few nutcases put in applications from time to time but, ignoring them for the time being, only a handful of serious contenders would have asked the JAAB to be considered.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.