A fundamental bedrock of any democratic system of government is access to the courts, which are ultimately responsible for the vindication of people's rights. That is why this Government has made resourcing and reforming the courts system a major priority. We have only to consider the great progress made on the ongoing refurbishment of courthouses around the country to realise no one can dispute that our courts system has improved since the establishment of the Courts Service as an independent agency in 1999. Judges are, of course, an essential part of the courts system and we have been fortunate in the dedication and commitment they display. They have a difficult job and they do it well.
The Bill before the House is not contentious. The effect of the legislation will be to reduce delays in the courts and generally speed up the judicial process. The maximum number of ordinary judges of each court is prescribed by law and can be altered only by way of primary legislation. Some may ask why we have to enact legislation every time we want to increase the number of judges or may suggest that legislation provide for a cap on the number of judges, with the Government of the day making the determination as to the actual number of judges required. However, given the central importance of the Judiciary, it always has been the practice for the Oireachtas rather than Ministers or Governments to make decisions on judicial numbers. Any decision to depart from this practice could give rise to constitutional and legal ramifications and, therefore, would need to be carefully considered. On balance, it is right that the Oireachtas should make this essential decision.
Legislation provides that the number of ordinary judges of the High Court shall not be more than 31. For clarity, my references to ordinary judges of a court refer to the judges of the court other than the president of the court in question. I use the word "ordinary" in this context. The Bill before the House provides that the maximum number of ordinary judges of the High Court can be increased by four to 35.
The Bill also provides for increases in the number of ordinary judges in both the Circuit and District Courts, namely, for an increase of four judges from 33 to 37 in the Circuit Court and of six judges from 54 to 60 in the District Court. This legislation is being promoted because the appointment of additional judges is required to deal with delays and speed up the judicial process in general. The measure is also being taken to strengthen the criminal justice system in the context of a package of measures now in train to deal with serious crime.
The following factors have been taken into account in coming to this decision. The President of the High Court wishes to appoint additional judges to minimise waiting periods in the Central Criminal Court and to speed up judicial review cases, especially those arising from major infrastructural projects. In the case of the Circuit Court, cases are becoming more complex and, consequentially, lengthier. The available judges are allocated by the President of the Circuit Court in such a way as to minimise backlogs in criminal cases. However, this has had a knock-on effect on civil and family law business and, consequently, cases in some circuits take up to two years to reach court.
The workload of the District Court is also becoming more complex and lengthy. In particular, additional judges are required to implement fully the provisions of the Children Act 2001. Moreover, the population of the State is increasing, Garda numbers are at an all-time high and we are living through an unprecedented economic boom, all of which has an impact on the courts.
I will now make some comments on the courts system. The establishment in 1999 of the Courts Service as an independent agency represented the most radical reorganisation of court services in Ireland since the foundation of the State. The mission statement of the agency is, "[t]o manage the courts, support the judiciary and provide a high quality and professional service to all ... the courts". There is probably general agreement that the Courts Service fulfils this task admirably.
I am responsible for ensuring the service is adequately funded and, in this regard, €102.8 million has been provided in 2007 for the Courts Service. This represents a 20% increase on the 2006 sum. Since its foundation, the service has made great progress in improving the stock of courthouses nationwide. Many county town courthouses have been refurbished and other major upgrading works have been completed in places such as Cork, Limerick, Dundalk and Castlebar.
The allocation for capital works on courthouses for this year stands at €29.6 million or €10 million more than the previous year. Courthouse refurbishment projects due for completion this year include those at Nenagh, Tullamore, Fermoy, Thurles and Blanchardstown. In addition, a maintenance fund for courthouse repairs, comprising €11.7 million, has been allocated for 2007. This fund includes €4 million for minor works and is designed to ensure that the courthouse stock is maintained in good condition in keeping with its role as the public expression of the administration of justice in the State.
A new criminal courts complex in Dublin will be the first public private partnership project undertaken in the justice family. The new state-of-the-art complex will be constructed on a State-owned site in Parkgate Street adjacent to Heuston railway station. It will be developed in accordance with best practice on similar projects elsewhere. The new complex is due to be completed in 2009.
The building will be designed to concentrate all central Dublin criminal business in one serviced location. This will involve the transfer of courts and administrative offices from three jurisdictions — District Court, Circuit Court and Central Criminal Court — to the new facility. The new complex will contain an underground point of entry for prisoners, appropriately equipped holding cells, victim support facilities, separate jury and witness facilities, a press and media centre, consultation and waiting areas and a cafeteria.
The centralising of all criminal business in the new complex will also mean the Four Courts will be freed up for civil business. Approval has been given to the Courts Service to proceed with nine other green field court projects, by way of public private partnership, as part of a new envelope of €50 million for such projects over the next two years. These include full District and Circuit Court services for locations nationwide. The Courts Service will use a new investment methodology known as "bundling". This approach will allow flexibility to the marketplace to bid for group or individual schemes, generating best value for the taxpayer and early delivery.
Recently, a series of legislative proposals was announced to deal with organised crime. The legislation proposes combating the abuse of bail, increasing detention periods, restricting the right to silence, lengthening the sentences to be served and providing for the enhanced use of forensic science and it is one of the most comprehensive anti-crime legislative packages ever brought forward. The measures include detention of suspects for up to seven days, which applies in the case of drug trafficking offences. This will be extended to those suspected of murder involving use of a firearm, use of a firearm with intent to endanger life and so-called "tiger" kidnappings and similar activities. The law on the right to silence will be extended through allowing inferences from silences to be drawn in the case of all arrestable offences in line with the recommendations in the balance in the criminal law group's interim report.
New cautions will be included which will make it clear that withholding information in certain circumstances may be taken into account in determining guilt or innocence. Changes will be made to make it more difficult for those charged with gangland offences to get bail. New proposals have been put forward to deal with re-offending. The legislation will provide for new offences where a person is found in possession of equipment for use in connection with murder or drug trafficking, for example, weighing scales or money counting machines or cash that is the proceeds of a crime or for use in the commission of a crime and where the equipment or the cash cannot be accounted for. The cash or equipment will be confiscated. This will ensure that those who assist and facilitate the gangland bosses will be exposed to severe penalties of up to five years imprisonment. The Government has also agreed to the establishment of a DNA database.
I refer to a number of related issues in which Senators will be interested, namely sentencing and the judicial council Bill. Sentencing is a complex matter and many variable factors must be taken into account in each case. However, to address this issue, the board of the Courts Service established a steering committee in October 2004 to plan for and provide a system of information on sentencing. The board's initiative is designed to provide a systemic form of information as a reference point for judges. The terms of reference are to plan for and to provide information on sentencing. The steering committee has reviewed sentencing systems around the world and decided to establish a pilot project in the Circuit Court in Dublin. The objectives of the project are to identify criteria and other information employed by the Judiciary in sentencing for particular offence types in criminal proceedings; to record and retrieve such information in individual cases; to design and develop a database to store the information retrieved and enable its retrieval in accordance with various search criteria; to share or disseminate the information, utilising information and communications technology, via a judge's intranet or other means; and to assemble appropriate material on sentencing for a benchbook and website. Briefing meetings to explain the project have been held with judges of the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court and court registrars who are involved in the initial phase of the pilot project. A pilot project commenced in the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court in January 2007. Two researchers have begun to collect and collate information on sentencing outcomes in cases on indictment in designated courts in accordance with criteria specified by the committee. It is anticipated the pilot project will run for an eight-week period and that it will be evaluated prior to a further pilot.
Work on the scheme of the judicial council Bill is at an advanced stage in my Department and it is expected that it will be brought before Government shortly. The Bill will establish a judicial council with responsibility for a number of matters. Among these, the council will devise a code of ethics and investigate complaints about judicial misbehaviour. An important feature of this disciplinary process will be that lay people, that is, people who are not judges or lawyers, will be involved in the process. The council will also be responsible for judicial education and training and the exchange of information among judges on such matters as sentencing. The legislation will build on the report of the committee on judicial conduct and ethics chaired by the former Chief Justice, Ronan Keane. The report recognised the need for a procedure to deal with complaints of judicial misconduct which, while serious, might not warrant the ultimate sanction of impeachment by the Oireachtas. Consultations on the proposed Bill have, as usual, taken place with the Office of the Attorney General. The Chief Justice has also been consulted. When the scheme of the Bill has been approved by Government, it is intended to make it available to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. Views that may emerge from the joint committee can be taken into account during the drafting of the Bill, which will proceed at the same time.
There is little use in having extra judges and a well resourced courts system if many people are priced out of the legal process. The issue of legal costs is deserving of investigation and that is why the Government established the legal costs working group to examine the issue. There are three main strands to the group's report. First, it recommends the replacement of the existing taxation of costs system with a regime that would comprise the establishment of a legal costs regulator-body to formulate recoverable cost guidelines based on an assessment of the amount of work reasonably required to be done in typical cases; a simplified assessment process, based on the recoverable cost guidelines prescribed by the regulatory body, to be carried out by a legal costs assessment office where legal bills are disputed; and, where assessments are appealed, an appeals process conducted by an appeals adjudicator.
Second, the report calls for significant improvements to be made in the quality and quantity of the information that a solicitor is required to provide to clients and the manner in which it is to be supplied. Third, the report recommends a number of legislative and procedural changes to reduce delays in court hearings and to expedite the legal process. Following the Government's endorsement of the report's recommendations, an expert group was established to advise on their implementation. The implementation advisory group's report has been received and a further announcement on the matter will be made shortly. Once the new cost arrangements have been put in place, the market for civil legal services will become more predictable, consistent and transparent for consumers. This transparency will also make it easier for consumers to recognise competitive prices for the services they require.
Before turning to the provisions of the Bill I would like to mention an exciting development. The Courts Service has launched its first report on family law proceedings, entitled Family Law Matters. This will be the first in a series of reports, which is a Courts Service initiative to shine a light on family courts and to dispel myths and misunderstandings that may exist because of an historic lack of information in this relevant and human area of law. This initiative was permitted by a change in the law on the in camera rule in family law. Dr. Carol Coulter was engaged to carry out the reporting of family law on a pilot basis. The staff of the service provided assistance and information to her in producing this report for the public. The report provides information under three headings, namely, reports, trends and statistics, and judgments. The reports are newspaper style records of what happened in a bundle of cases across the country. The identity of participants is protected and the area of law examined is explained in accessible and useable language.
I now turn to the provisions of the Bill. Section 1 deals with definitions and need not detain us. Section 2 provides that the number of ordinary judges of the High Court shall not be more than 35, an increase of four. Section 3 provides that the number of ordinary judges of the Circuit Court shall not be more than 37, an increase of four. Section 4 provides that the number of judges of the District Court — in addition to the president of the court — shall not be more than 60, an increase of six.
Section 5 is a technical provision which, simply put, makes the six additional judges of the District Court unassigned judges rather than assigning them to particular districts. As such, the six additional judges can be allocated by the President of the District Court as he sees fit. Section 6 sets out the Short Title and collective citation. Given the size of the Bill, there is little more I can say on its detail.
As I stated at the outset, there is nothing contentious in the Bill. It provides for additional judges and will help reduce delays in the courts and generally speed up the judicial process. It complements the measures being taken on organised crime, will result in earlier trials and will bring the level of judicial resources to a record high. I commend this Bill to the House.
