Seanad debates

Wednesday, 28 November 2018

Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

10:30 am

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Would I ever stray?

Section 44 has been brought directly, as well as quite appropriately as the two sections reflect on each other, into the discussion by Senators McDowell and Bacik. I am just following their example.

It is quite extraordinary that an appointments commission would deal with issues such as probity and all of these other matters. This, by and large, faceless commission, apart from a spattering of judges, will make decisions to say that somebody, including judges and legal academics, who occupies fairly high positions, may not have a degree of competence and a degree of probity. It is a strong thing to say about anybody that he or she does not have the degree of probity, honour and judiciousness, as well as not being suitable on grounds of character and temperament. These enormous circumstances would be actionable measures if the person found out about them.

The section states the commission will not recommend the name of a person to the Minister unless he or she has displayed all of these qualities. To me, that is a most astonishing thing. The unfortunate victims of this process will not even be informed. Not only under this legislation is the Cabinet deprived of this information, I understand the people themselves would be deprived of it. Essentially, when a barrister, solicitor or legal academic applies for one of these posts, he or she could be turned down on the grounds that he or she lacks the character, does not have sufficient probity or temperament, or is incompetent, unworthy dishonourable or his or her health is all over the place. Are the reasons for refusing to nominate somebody made known to the applicant?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.