Seanad debates

Wednesday, 20 February 2019

Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

10:30 am

Photo of Gerard CraughwellGerard Craughwell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

This might address the Minister's thinking. I refer to a situation where the Attorney General is sitting on this commission. The commission has advertised a position which it was not possible to fill in the first round. There would then be a second round. That second round could bring the position into public debate. The media would then have a field day regarding the commission being unable to appoint anybody. Freedom of information requests would then follow on how many applications there were. In that scenario, the names cannot be revealed but it would be possible to find out how many candidates applied for the position. There would then be media speculation that out of perhaps 40 people who applied, the commission could not find three. The Minister can imagine how there would be a field day in that scenario.

If it is not possible to appoint someone on a first round, and having gone through a second round, would it not be advisable that the Attorney General would be free, under his or her Article 30 constitutional role, to make a recommendation to the Cabinet based on what transpired during the selection process? It breaks us out of the transparency I have been looking for but, at the same time, it does not allow a process to go on indefinitely without being addressed. It would allow for the filling of the vacancy. That is something we were talking about last night and the Minister expressed concern about leaving positions vacant. It can be imagined how difficult the situation would be if it was not possible to find three suitable names in the first and second rounds. There has to be a proviso of some sort in the Bill, which would allow the Government to take advice from its legal adviser to fill that position.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.