Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 27 Apr 1994

Vol. 442 No. 1

Written Answers. - Judicial Appointments and Training.

Jim O'Keeffe

Question:

46 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Justice the number of High Court, Circuit Court and District Court Judges now appointed; her views on whether there is a case for the appointment of additional judges; and whether, as in other countries, training courses are available for those who are appointed as judges.

Minister for Justice (Mrs. Geoghegan-Quinn)

Including the Presidents of the various courts there are currently 17 High Court judges, 18 Circuit Court judges and 46 judges of the District Court.

The appointment of additional judges is one of the matters under consideration following a review of activity levels in the High, Circuit and District Courts to assess the impact of the altered jurisdiction of the courts under the Courts Act, 1991. The result of this review will form the basis of proposals which I will be bringing to Government with a view to eliminating arrears in the courts. However, I could not undertake, in response to a Parliamentary Question, to outline my proposals prior to their consideration by the Government. With regard to training for judges, the scope for the exercise by me of initiatives in this area is limited having regard to the Constitutional independence of the Judiciary.

Our system of appointment to all levels of the Judiciary is based on the concept of bringing in trained and experienced legal practitioners. This contrasts with the system in certain other European States where recruitment is of new legal graduates who are subsequently trained in their judicial functions. The formal qualification required for appointment as judge of the District Court is not less than ten years' practice as a barrister or solicitor; ten years' practice as a barrister is required for appointment as a judge of the Circuit Court; and 12 years' practice as a barrister is the requirement for appointment as a judge of the Supreme and High Courts. To become a barrister or solicitor in the first place requires successful completion of a course of studies laid down by qualifying authorities. Judges would on appointment therefore have a wide knowledge of the law itself and of court procedures.

But I recognise of course the widely-held view that judges, especially, those who have occasion to deal with cases in the family law area, sexual offences and so on should have the opportunity of participating in seminars, conferences etc, with others such as psychiatrists and psychologists who provide expert services for people involved in these difficult human situations and who possess valuable insights and experience concerning the handling of such cases. The Judiciary are aware that I am most willing to facilitate exchanges of this kind by providing the necessary resources and I know that they themselves are providing to take certain initiatives in this regard. This is a very positive development.

I know also that Judge Peter Smithwick, President of the District Court, has already initiated induction training for all new judges appointed to the District Court. This initiative has been very well received by the Judiciary and I would like to compliment the President on it.

Finally, I should point out that statutory meetings of the judges of the District Court are held up to twice annually under the provisions of section 36 (3) of the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act, 1961 for the purpose of discussing matters relating to the discharge of business of that court including such matters as "the avoidance of undue divergences in the exercise by the judges of the jurisdiction of that court and the general level of fines and other penalties". While there is no statutory provision for such meetings in relation to judges of the Circuit and Higher Courts, I understand that such meetings do take place.