Seanad debates

Thursday, 9 May 2019

Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

1:30 pm

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

-----has shown himself to be very liberal on civil liability or damages and that it should think long and hard about appointing him to a vacancy on the Court of Appeal and whether that predisposition should be represented in that court. It might wish to appoint someone of a more conservative outlook, which would be a perfectly legitimate consideration to which to address its mind, however it might decide. It might decide that Mr. Justice Michael McDowell was a very heavy sentencer in the criminal courts and that it was a good thing to have him in the Court of Appeal to bring a bit of rigour to sentencing law. It might think the exact opposite and that someone much more lenient was needed as the prisons were silting up with people being sent there to no good. It is a decision for the Government.

What I find difficult to understand is what the word "merit" means in the context of the legislation and how it is suggested the commission will decide between conservatives and liberals, lenient sentencers or hard ones, generous people with damages and people who take a strong view on the powers of the police, one way or the other. These are the kinds of issues the Government must always consider and it is wrong to ask it to consider a shortlist compiled by a group which is prohibited from taking those issues into account. I emphasise that point. If the purpose of the legislation is to confront the Government with a shortlist in circumstances in which it will be embarrassing to go outside of it, we are left with a situation in which the people making the recommendations and compiling the shortlists are addressing issues and adjudicating on inclusion or non-inclusion by reference to criteria which the Government does not take into account. It appears that all of these provisions are props to that process of embarrassing the Government were it to appoint someone who had not been recommended.In those circumstances, I really do believe that the amendment I am proposing should be made.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.