It is interesting that since 1990 there have been ten pieces of legislation which might broadly be described as courts related Acts. This Bill will be the eleventh in that list. The level of activity to which this testifies is indicative of the importance which attaches to the legal system in our lives. It is also indicative of the pace of change which has been a feature of the last decade in so far as that system is concerned.
Of the various changes which have taken place I highlight in particular the establishment of the courts service in November 1999 and the establishment of the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board in 1995. The Bill before the House builds upon the changes of the past and also contains certain elements which are more novel in nature.
First, I want to focus on two elements of the Bill which might be seen as developing a number of provisions which were contained in the Courts and Court Officers Bill, 1995. In that Bill, solicitors of ten years' standing were made eligible for appointment as Circuit Court judges. The perception, which has proven to be justified, was that solicitor judges would bring valuable insights to the Circuit Court bench given the particular role which solicitors generally play within our legal system. In a further reforming measure, provision was also made whereby Circuit Court judges of four years' standing would be eligible for appointment to the High Court or the Supreme Court. In effect, therefore, an indirect mechanism was provided whereby solicitors appointed to the Circuit Court bench might, over time, ultimately serve on the bench of both of those courts.
This Bill takes those provisions one step further in that it gives effect to a key recommendation of a working group set up to consider the question of qualifications for appointment as judges of the High and Supreme Courts. That recommendation was that suitably qualified solicitors should in future be eligible for direct appointment to those courts. While the Bill does not incorporate the full detail of the group's recommendations, which on closer examination were judged to be overly prescriptive, the broad outline of the recommendations is reflected in the basic policy thrust which underlies it.
Accordingly, the Bill specifies that practising solicitors of not less than 12 years' standing should be eligible for direct appointment to the High and Supreme Courts. The intention behind this provision is that over time the pool of suitable candidates for appointment to the superior courts will be enlarged and that the greater diversity in profile which may result will enrich further the judicial Bench.
In 1995 we also saw the establishment of the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board. A key function of the JAAB is to recommend to the Government the names of persons suitable for appointment as judges. While the advice of the JAAB cannot be binding on the Government because of constitutional reasons, the Government has direct regard to the names recommended in advising the President on the appointment of a judge and it is a matter of record that all appointments made to date have come from the recommended list.
Under this Bill the JAAB will have a new responsibility in respect of first-time appointments to the superior courts. When recommending a person for such an appointment, the JAAB should be of the opinion that the person in question has an appropriate knowledge of the decisions of the superior courts and an appropriate knowledge and experience of the practice and procedures of those courts. The JAAB is to have particular regard to the nature and extent of the practice of the person concerned in so far as it relates to his or her personal conduct of proceedings in the Supreme and High Courts. This personal conduct of proceedings which is under scrutiny can be as an advocate or a solicitor instructing counsel, or both.
Given the important advisory role which the JAAB has, it is considered appropriate to introduce additional elements of transparency and accountability into its procedures. To that end, the Bill provides that the JAAB will make an annual report to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform which will be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. This report will set out details of the JAAB's activities and performance of its functions. It may include information relating to topics such as the number of persons considered by the board for appointment to the various judicial offices in the period concerned, the gender, professional qualifications and experience of those people and of those appointed to judicial office. The report may also include information relating to the procedures used by the board for examining applications and selecting persons it recommends to the Minister.
The Bill also provides for an important safeguard relating to the JAAB's report in that steps will be taken to ensure it will not include any information which discloses or could disclose the identity of persons considered by the board in respect of appointment to judicial office and who were not appointed to such office.
Some elements of the Bill might be seen as more novel in nature and were not provided for in the Bill as originally published – the Courts and Court Officers Bill, 1995. It is of importance that there be no unreasonable delay in the delivery of court judgments. Accordingly, we are providing for a register of court judgments. The 1995 Bill, as published, made provision for a judge of the European Court of Human Rights to be eligible for appointment to the superior courts. During the passage of the Bill, it became clear that there could in future be judges attached to other courts and tribunals who might equally be brought within this Bill's scope, for example a judge of the International Criminal Court. The Bill has been amended to address this point.
Part III deals with additional appointments. Part IV deals with matters pertaining to both the Circuit Court and the District Court and the question of the increase of jurisdiction. Part V deals with miscellaneous matters.
The Bill, essentially, is practical legislation designed to enhance the smooth running of the courts and to facilitate litigants in terms of access to justice. I commend it to the House.
