Legislation providing for the disciplining of judges will be published later this year, according to a spokesman for the Department of Justice, writes Carol Coulter, Legal Affairs Correspondent.
It is expected to be modelled on the report of the Committee on Judicial Conduct and Ethics, chaired by the Chief Justice, Mr Justice Keane. However, it will differ from these proposals in that the committee charged with investigating complaints against judges will have a stronger lay representation.
The matter has become more urgent in the light of the controversy over Judge Brian Curtin, who last month was acquitted by direction of the trial judge of charges of possessing child pornography.
There has been some concern in judicial circles about the delay in legislating on the basis of the Chief Justice's report, which was published in 2001. This has left a vacuum where the only option in dealing with judges against whom complaints have been made is impeachment, which, to date, has never been used.
A proposal from the last government for a constitutional amendment permitting a body to be set up to deal with judicial conduct and ethics was withdrawn when it failed to obtain support from the opposition. This was thought necessary because of the constitutional independence of the judiciary.
However, the proposals brought forward by a committee of the judiciary itself allowed for the matter to be dealt with by legislation rather than a constitutional amendment.
Under the Chief Justice's proposals, a judicial conduct and ethics committee would receive complaints about an individual judge, filter them, and send serious complaints to a panel of inquiry. This would be made up of two judges nominated by the committee and one lay person from a pool of three appointed by the Attorney General.
This panel would conduct an inquiry, which, when considering serious allegations, would hold its hearing in public. It would report back to the conduct and ethics committee.
It would then recommend action, ranging from a public or private reprimand to a handing over of the matter to the Oireachtas for impeachment proceedings. These proposals, however, were criticised by the Law Society at the time for failing to have representation from the legal professions, and from politicians for having only one lay person on the panel.
