Barry Ward (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

This is a fairly straightforward technical amendment. The provision in section 46(1)(b) requires the commission to have interviewed an applicant when considering an application. I feel strongly that there is a practical matter to be considered here. We have discussed this before. The process for most applicants for judicial office is a sensitive one. They do not want word to be out there that they have applied for judicial office because in many circumstances it will spell an end to a practice or make things difficult for them. That is especially true if they ultimately do not achieve the office. I understand that the commission is bound by confidentiality and that other provisions in the Bill are designed to ensure there is confidentiality and secrecy around these applications. The interview process holds two difficulties. The first relates to the confidentiality I mentioned. The second is that it introduces - I have complained about this previously with respect to this Bill - a Civil Service-style approach to something that does not fit into a Civil Service-sized hole. I say that with the greatest respect to the civil servants present. The job a judge does is not merely an administrative function. In assessing whether someone is an appropriate or the most appropriate candidate for judicial office, many factors must be considered. I do not think an interview process will assist the commission in arriving at the decision. The reality is that the commission is made up of people who will be aware of the corpus of work the applicant has done. They will also be aware of the person's professional reputation or otherwise. If they are not, the application process will usually carry with it details of the person's professional achievements, records and so on. The notion that if the process does not carry with it such information, or if the commission does not have enough information, it can be gleaned from an interview is to mistake the manner in which these things can operate. In this amendment I suggest that while the commission may decide it wants to interview someone or to speak to someone in any number of circumstances or for any number of reasons that arise from the application or anything else, the notion that it is an absolute requirement before the applicant can move forward is a mistake. I suggest that the simple requirement for the commission to interview the applicant be removed and that is what my amendment proposes.