Submission to Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice on Head of Judicial Appointments Commission Bill

We welcome the new legislation and the efforts at reforming this area which, if successful, will provide crucial public confidence in the administration of justice. There are many positive aspects to this Bill which wille result in practical improvements on the current system for judicial appointments. We feel that the decision to make the Chief Justice chair of the Commission is a wise one which will engender more support for this Bill than its predecessor. We also commend the move to provide for a permanent office with a director and staff to deal with this crucial issue. However, we also feel that there are many improvements which could be made to the Bill as it stands. Most importantly, we feel that there is a lack of sufficient guidance in the legislation with regard to eligibility criteria, assessment mechanisms etc. We expand on this point below. If the legislation does not contain enough direction to guide these processes, the JAC could be no more effective than the JAAB has been, and even become a near copy of that body, recommending 5 rather than 7 names, but lacking the crucial reforms in the area of proper assessment of candidates to make these changes meaningful. Genuine reform in this area necessitates a body which is truly advisory, in the sense that it will actually assess the candidates and only put forward names of the most suitable in order to help and guide the use of the government’s constitutional discretion to appoint judges. We are also of the opinion that, in order to provide for transparency and secure confidence in the new system, it would be preferable to include detail in the legislation about the process for selection once the names are sent to the Minister. This is something which has led to controversy recently due to the lack of transparency or agreed process in the present system for the making of this determination. A clear direction in the Bill about this decision-making process would provide much-needed re-assurance in the fairness of the system.ACCEPTEDnon-peer-reviewe