Judicial appointments and accountability
Deputy Shortall raises concern about Supreme Court appointments, the Government–Oireachtas–Judiciary relationship, and the need for reform and ministerial accountability. The Taoiseach defends the appointment process and separation of powers, says the Minister for Justice will answer on process, and repeatedly rejects the criticism as misunderstandings or interruptions.
Events of the past few weeks with regard to an appointment to the Supreme Court have put the spotlight very much on the relationship between the Government and Oireachtas and the Judiciary. They have certainly created problems for both and potentially brought both into disrepute. There is no doubt that we need to deal with the issue at hand, in particular the appointment to the Supreme Court, but we also need to see the much-needed and long-promised reform of the relationship between the Oireachtas and the Judiciary. There is no doubt but that the Dáil and the public are entitled to know the process by which an appointment was made to the Supreme Court. Regrettably, the Minister for Justice has refused to outline that process to us and to abide by the long-established tradition where a Minister comes into the House and explains his or her actions to ensure accountability to this House. I am saying to the Taoiseach, respectfully, that he needs to ensure that his Minister for Justice abides by that tradition of being accountable to the House. It is a requirement of a Minister and a requirement of the Taoiseach that he ensure that that opportunity is provided to Members of this House. We have to end the charade of the Minister talking about coming in and answering questions under the regular arrangements for oral questions. That just does not wash. It is not acceptable by any standards and the Taoiseach needs to end that charade.
We need to have a full explanation as to the criteria or the matrix that were used in identifying why one person was appointed to the Supreme Court as opposed to the other three candidates who had applied. I stress that I am talking about the process, not the merits of one individual over another. We also need an explanation of the reason the Minister did not inform other party leaders within the coalition about the existence of those other candidates.
The question which then arises is whether, in the absence of information about potential candidates, the Cabinet was actually capable of exercising collective responsibility under the Constitution. The other issue that we need an explanation in respect of is why there was a 12-month delay in filling a vacancy on the Supreme Court which first arose in June 2019. For all of those reasons, I ask the Taoiseach to respect this House and arrange for the Minister to come in and take questions in the normal manner.
Comment on this
I have answered questions on this issue on a number of occasions, as has the Tánaiste. The Minister for Justice will answer parliamentary questions in respect of it. I note what the Deputy has said in the context of the word "criteria". Criteria are not about process, they involve judgment calls in respect of candidates.
Comment on this
The criteria are all about process. One cannot have a process without them.
Comment on this
It then moves into breaching the separation of powers between the Oireachtas and the Judiciary.
Comment on this
I do. I explained it to the Taoiseach last week.
Comment on this
One name is always brought to the Cabinet and the Cabinet decides on that one name which is brought by the Minister for Justice. I do not understate the importance of the recommendation of the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, which made a recommendation that Mr. Justice Woulfe be appointed to the Supreme Court as a suitable candidate.
Comment on this
It made that recommendation on 9 March. That board is chaired by the Chief Justice and includes among its members the presidents of four courts.
Comment on this
The Taoiseach is insulting people's intelligence.
Comment on this
That is a significant body of opinion to recommend a candidate as being suitable for the Supreme Court.
I accept that the overall situation needs to be reformed, which is why the Government will shortly bring forward the Judicial Appointments Commission Bill. We will make amendments to the legislation that was piloted through the House by the former Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Shane Ross. At the time, I believed that the balance in the context of that legislation was wrong. The Government is of the opinion that the Chief Justice should chair such a commission for judicial appointments. The new legislation will be brought before the House as soon as it is ready. I accept the need for broader reform in the context of judicial appointments. The Constitution is clear about the manner in which judges are appointed and the Cabinet taking decisions in that regard. The name of Mr. Justice Woulfe was brought before the Cabinet and the Cabinet decided to appoint him to the Supreme Court in accordance with the Constitution and the law.
Comment on this
I ask the Taoiseach not to insult people's intelligence.
Comment on this
He is playing into the false narrative that his Fine Gael colleagues have been peddling for the past couple of weeks. It is beneath him to be doing that. I have appealed to the Taoiseach. He has a responsibility to Members of this House to ensure that the Minister is accountable to the House. I ask the Taoiseach to provide that opportunity for accountability. The Minister for Justice has refused to make herself amenable to accountability. The Ceann Comhairle, in upholding the rights of Members of this House, has been clear in setting out the requirements for accountability. I ask the Taoiseach to respect that, to respect this House and to insist that the Minister for Justice come here to make a statement and subject herself to questions and answers. We are entitled to that. It is nothing less than what we are entitled to. If the Taoiseach continues to refuse to allow that accountability, he will continue to damage the relationship between and reputation of the House and the Judiciary. I ask the Taoiseach to accede to the requests from all parties for the Minister to do her duty and for him to do his in order to ensure that this House operates properly.
Comment on this
My overarching objective in the context of this entire situation, and in particular the publication of letters between the Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Woulfe has been to uphold separation of powers between the Oireachtas and the Judiciary. I take that very seriously.
Comment on this
That has been my motivation from the beginning in the handling of this issue and was the motivation behind my statement to the House last week on this issue and it remains my overarching objective. I have not seen in the past in this House Ministers answering questions about specific judicial appointments.
Comment on this
That said, the Minister, Deputy McEntee, is prepared to come in and answer questions on process as part of her normal questions.
Comment on this
The Taoiseach is around a long time.
Comment on this
Just because Deputy Kelly shouts louder than others sometimes does not mean that he is right. That type of browbeating does not work with me Deputy Kelly.
Comment on this
That is beneath the Taoiseach.
Comment on this
I make the point and I have made it repeatedly, Mr. Justice Woulfe was appointed appropriately in accordance with the Constitution and with the law and of that there is no doubt. If one reads the Cabinet Handbook it states that very clearly.
Comment on this
It is insulting. The Taoiseach is letting down the institutions of the State.
Comment on this
He is letting himself down.