Lynn Boylan (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 35, between lines 24 and 25, to insert the following:

“Challenges without cause shown

57.(1) Each party may challenge without cause shown seven jurors and no more.

(2) Whenever a juror is lawfully challenged without cause shown, they shall not be included in the jury.”.

I acknowledge that the Minister for Justice, Deputy McEntee, has taken on board the concerns of the families about the right to have juries at inquests and that juries be independently selected. I also appreciate the fact that an inquest is inquisitorial and fact-finding and does not involve an adversarial process. Maybe the Minister of State can clarify a matter for me in order that I do not have to press these amendments. The rationale for tabling them relates to challenging jurors if there is a reason any of - I will not call them parties because that is what they are called in court cases - those who are involved in the inquest process want to raise an issue with the coroner if they have concerns about particular jurors.I am being told that section 59(2) provides for that at any stage prior to the jury being sworn in. Will the Minister of State clarify whether a legal party to the inquest can make an objection to the coroner about a juror under section 59(2)? If so, it is great, but we must ensure that, if such a challenge is made and the inquest gets under way, the process is not appealed to judicial review. Lawyers differ. The legal team that I have spoken to says that the Bill does not provide for the challenging of jurors but the Department is saying that it does. My concern is that, if there can be such differences in opinion, the matter can be challenged in the courts, leading to further delays in the inquest, which no one wants.