I understand that the Minister for Justice would like to mention a certain matter.
RULES OF COURT.
CATHAOIRLEACH
I was anxious to get some information as to when the Seanad would be willing to take the three motions of approval of the Rules of Court. The Rules of Court, of course, have to be made by me, with the concurrence of a rule-making committee for each of the three courts, the High Court, the Circuit Court, and the District Court. I have now received from the committees the draft rules. They can be formally made on Friday, which is the day on which the Court Officers Bill can be signed, and if it is agreeable to the Seanad I would suggest that the motions of approval could be taken on Friday.
CATHAOIRLEACH
Of course, that is a matter entirely for the House, but I certainly will not ask them to do it, and for this reason: these rules are very complicated; the draft rules, relating to the Circuit Court, which I have only seen a moment ago, amount to 156 pages. The Rules of the High Court are less, but they are substantial. We have not yet seen the rules for the District Court, but to say that the House is to study all these rules and be prepared to adopt them on Friday is a task that I certainly will not impose on it unless it wishes to undertake it. There is really no excuse that I can see for the delay in this matter, because the Court Officers Bill was introduced into the other House as far back as last February, and yet it did not leave the other House for three months, although it was not a very contentious Bill. At the end of three months it was quietly passed. It had to be passed before these rules could be considered, and I am not going to ask the House to take it on itself to consider these rules on Friday, unless it is their own wish to do so.
The draft rules of the High Court and the District Court have been in the hands of Senators for some time.
CATHAOIRLEACH
No, only the High Court Rules.
And the District Court.
CATHAOIRLEACH
No, I have only got them to-day.
I got mine about three days ago.
I also got a copy three days ago.
CATHAOIRLEACH
If you wish to read them and then discuss them it will take you three weeks. In this matter I really must ask the House to protect itself, because there is no hurry about these rules. The courts have done without them for three years and have got on all right, and a few months of further interval will not cause any consternation, either in the courts or in the minds of the public. As a matter of fact, I have been in conference with some of the judges on the matter and they tell me that as far as the High Court is concerned, they will be able to work away quite well with the existing rules until after the Recess. I do think it is quite unreasonable, and no reason is given as to why the House should be asked to take on and dispose of this important work in one day.
My desire to get approval of the rules now is that there would be then the Long Vacation interval to enable certain forms to be printed and other minutiae to be attended to, so that the rules might be in effective operation for the Michaelmas sittings of the courts. If the Seanad were unwilling to take up the consideration of the three motions on Friday I would like to suggest a date in or about the 20th, which is the date on which the Dáil will be re-assembling to consider the rules and to consider such amendments to Bills as may be made in the interval by the Seanad. I do not want to obtrude unduly on the Seanad my own personal arrangements, but I was anxious to get away on Saturday the 10th and it was to that end that I ventured on the hope, which may now be described as a forlorn hope, that the Seanad would agree to take these motions on Friday next. If they could not see their way to take them on Friday I would ask that the date to be fixed for this purpose might be the 21st or 22nd.
CATHAOIRLEACH
Perhaps the Minister will inform the House why the matter was delayed so long, why the Court Officers Bill was allowed to drag on for three months in the Dáil before reaching this House. If the Court Officers Bill had been passed with expedition the rules could have been signed and we could have considered them two months ago. But I think it is quite beyond all reason to ask us at this stage of the session either to deal with them now or a few weeks hence.
I cannot recollect that there was any delay in dealing with the Bill in the Dáil.
CATHAOIRLEACH
It was introduced on 27th February and it was passed on 23rd May.
The Easter Recess may have had something to do with the delay, but it was rather a long and complicated Bill and there were, in fact, two Committee Stages. But I think it was taken up in due course and in due order in the Dáil and that there was no unneccessary delay there.
CATHAOIRLEACH
There was none here.
The rules could not be made until the Court Officers Bill was passed, or until it began to take something approaching its final shape. The difficulty is one that I explained to Senators before. We could not make rules which would have mention of offices and officers that would not have statutory existence until the Court Officers Bill was law. That is why the rules, while ready for some little time back, had to wait on the passage of the Court Officers Bill. I am particularly anxious, and I think that there is an anxiety amongst the legal profession, that the Michaelmas session of the courts should not be entered on without the new rules being in effective operation; and the absence of rules, while it does not cause undue dislocation in the High Court or the Supreme Court, has been a distinct inconvenience for petitioners and litigants in the Circuit Court and the District Court. The fact that there has been an interval of some two years without rules does not really constitute a case for prolonging the inconvenience and I am really anxious that the Dáil and the Seanad should consider the motions of approval before adjourning for the summer. The alternative is to consider the rules in November. It will be some months after they have been formally approved by the Dáil and the Seanad before the necessary forms could be ready and before the rules come into effective consideration, so that, in fact, failure to approve the rules before the summer adjournment would mean, in practice, that it would be February or March of next year before they could come into operation in the courts.
I think the Cathaoirleach is fairly right in thinking that we could not be ready to discuss those rules on Friday next— that appears obvious to everybody. It is also fairly evident that we ought not to delay in taking them, until October or November next. If we had a fortnight or some period of that sort to consider the matter, I think it would be hardly fair to insist on holding the rules up for such a long time as that I do not doubt that if we put our heads to it and consulted people who know most about the matter we could do everything that the Seanad would be expected to do in the way of criticism within a couple of weeks. I bow entirely to our Chairman if he says that such a thing would be impossible, but looked at from the ordinary Senator's point of view, I believe it is not a case where the Seanad, which is always anxious to help the Government in any way it can, would be doing things that it ought not to do, by dealing with this matter in a fortnight. I think if we could get a couple of weeks to consider the matter it would be all that would be reasonably wanted.
I should be sorry to divert the Minister from his well-earned holiday. He is a very hard-worked man, but unless we are expected to shut our eyes and swallow these rules whole, it would be quite impossible to go through them in any way in such a time. If we had plenty of time to go through them some of us would not be very much the wiser. I certainly do not see how it would be possible, at the moment, with a bundle of Bills still before us, to pass these 156 pages of matter in one case, and so many other pages in the others at one sitting. It would not be possible to do justice to these rules in such a time whether we could do so in the course of a fortnight, is another matter. It seems to be a question whether we must swallow them whole or go through them in detail.
I agree with Senator Jameson. Of course, in this matter we would be guided largely by professional opinion. The suggestion of Senator Jameson that we should have such time as is necessary to consult such opinion ought to be adopted, and the intervening fortnight would enable all that to be done. I think it is important, as the Minister suggested, that the rules should be ready by November.
As a mere lay man I do not intend to take any part in the discussion of these rules, and I think there is a large majority of the Seanad much in the same position. Would it not be possible to submit the case to a Select Committee?
CATHAOIRLEACH
That would be an alternative. I do not think that the District Court Rules have been circulated yet.
Yes, the District Court Rules were circulated three or four days ago.
CATHAOIRLEACH
To Senators?
Yes, and the High Court and Supreme Court Rules. The latest are the Circuit Court Rules which have just now been circulated. Senators are aware of the position, that the Courts of Justice Act practically enforces a compromise, with regard to the rules. I can make no rule without the concurrence of the majority of each of the three committees. Consequently the rules might in some respects not be what I might desire or wish, but I have to agree or else there can be no rules. We have to agree with the majority of each of the three committees and the rules are made by me with the concurrence of such majority and are presented to the Dáil and the Seanad. The practical position in each House is that the rules have to be accepted or rejected in globo. A motion approving of them is passed or refused, but there cannot be and there is no room for amendment here.
CATHAOIRLEACH
I must not be taken as agreeing with the Minister when he says the rules are to be passed in globo or not at all. I do not make a definite pronouncement upon that now because this is the first time I heard it. I am merely putting forward my impression from memory and that is that each rule must receive the approval of the House. I do not want that to be taken as necessarily correct just now because I have not an opportunity of seeing whether it is or not. My impression is that the form of the legislation compels the House to consider and pass each rule. The suggestion about a select committee is one that the House can consider later. But a select committee would not dispose of the matter because a select committee could only report to the House and the House would have to pass the resolutions with regard to these rules so that that does not obviate the necessity of the House meeting. We have heard the Minister's view now, and while we are always anxious to facilitate the Government in passing their Bills and rules and regulations, at the same time we must have some regard to our public duties. Consequently I suggest that the House should consider the matter in the meantime— we need not arrive at a decision to-day —and by to-morrow or Friday we can come to some conclusion as to what we will do.
All we can do about them is to put down a series of amendments to change them. Ninety-eight per cent. of the rules are possibly non-contentious. Because they happen to be legal they ought not to be more sacred than rules in connection with other Acts. It comes to this: we want a fortnight to file amendments against the rules.
CATHAOIRLEACH
Any member of the House has a right, if he wishes to object to each and every one of these rules, and he should, at least, have an opportunity of studying them. If any member of the House says that he has already studied them, he is entitled to the greatest amount of credit. I have not had an opportunity of reading them.
It is that objection with which I am concerned, and I am trying to bear out what you are arguing. It is the amendments which will be put forward to alter certain rules that are contentious that we will have to discuss. If we waited for two years longer we would not get any nearer to passing them, and the shorter they are before the House probably the better.
I think we can safely agree to take them about the twenty-first instant. I understand that the Dáil is meeting on the twentieth. and any business that may come back to us from the Dáil would probably be available by the twenty-first or twenty-second instant, so that it would be convenient for us to meet about then.
Senator Douglas seems to be assuming that the whole of the rules will be got through in the other House in one day, and that the other business which may be returned by the Seanad will be disposed of in that time. I think he is rather optimistic in that. He also apparently thinks that the motion to confirm the rules is to be a mere matter of form. I think the Senator is mistaken in that. Adequate time should be given for studying the rules. Some of us attach a good deal of importance to them as, to a large extent, they affect the whole commercial and social life of the country and are comparable in many respects to legislation. We are anxious to have expert opinion on them. I do not know whether it is practicable to ascertain that in the time suggested. If we meet within a fortnight a good many of those interested in the rules cannot attend, although we would all like to be here. Three weeks hence would suit those who could not attend in a fortnight. I do not know how that would suit the Minister, or the members of the House. So far as practicable, the convenience of those interested in the rules should be considered, seeing that we have considered the convenience of Ministers as we are anxious to do. Senator Gogarty suggested that ninety-eight per cent of the rules may be non-controversial. That may be true, but one has to study them to see how true it is. They require expert attention, and as we are the custodians of the interests of the public, it is our duty to try and discharge that function so far as these rules are concerned, as they affect every member of the community. I would not oppose an adjournment for three weeks, but I would oppose an adjournment for a fortnight.
CATHAOIRLEACH
I think the safer plan is to do nothing about them at present. We will be sitting to-morrow and, probably, on Friday, and before we rise on Friday we will be able to come to some decision. Senators will have an opportunity of looking at the rules between this and Friday, and will be in a better position to form a decision on them.