Seanad debates

Wednesday, 28 November 2018

Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

10:30 am

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

The appointment of an ordinary member of the Supreme Court, whether it is a man or woman, is of major importance. We only have to look to America. It was not the appointment of a chief justice that caused President Trump to get into such a state of high excitement but rather the appointment of an ordinary member because he was affecting the complexion or balance within the court. This distinction between the presidencies and the ordinary membership of the various courts is of doubtful value. The amendment we have tabled seeks to look at the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court ordinary memberships and presidencies in an equally serious light and protect the Government's rights in the process.

The Government is always free to look for advice, have advice or set up procedures to advise it on such appointments, and I have no problem with that. I object when the so-called advisory body is portrayed, as it has been by the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Ross, as a means whereby politicians would no longer have a say in making judicial appointments. That is manifestly false. It is unconstitutional and wrong. Elected politicians who are part of the Government have, as I said, the right and duty to make appointments of judges to the best of their judgment. They can take advice from other people as to the qualities of potential candidates but it is their judgment, for which they are responsible and for which the Constitution holds them accountable and gives them discretion in advising the President.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.