Judiciary has been a law unto itself too long

IT has been remarked that no nation has ever managed to sue itself to greatness, but given this country’s love of litigation there could be a first time for everything. Indeed, there is a perception that our legal system is the last great preserve of class and privilege. Rightly, or wrongly, its higher echelons are regarded as a bastion where preferment can owe more to blood ties or old boy networks than to merit or ability. This image must change.

The Judicial Appointments Bill threatens to turn much time-honoured tradition on its head by taking absolute control away from our learned friends on who gets to wield the gavel and wear wig and gown.

Given that lawyers have honed their skills at interrupting and even devouring each other, it is not surprising that the Bill has caused consternation. So far, the Bill has seen some 200 amendments.

Justice Minister Charlie Flanagan yesterday disagreed with Attorney General Séamus Woulfe’s description of it as “a dog’s dinner”, but he did feel it was a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth.

Whatever the arguments, for generations the law has remained impervious to outside influence. Where it ought to be utterly accessible to the ordinary person, it appears aloof, mysterious and inaccessible. The high priests of the bar have to accept that everything must change. If this entails contamination by allowing mere mortals into the exalted inner sanctuary, then so be it.

The Bill proposed by Shane Ross allows for a judicial appointments commission of 13 members, only three of whom would be judges.

It would also have a lay chair and be accountable to the Oireachtas.

Understandably, it has caused some anxiety in the judiciary, but perhaps had they been more amenable to change down the decades the shock would be less acute.