The quality of our judges is a matter of great importance but to suggest, as Senator Michael McDowell has done, that cuts in judicial pay have led to a reduction in quality of those being appointed to the bench sounds too much like special pleading. There certainly has been a trend in recent years whereby people not regarded as being at the top of their profession have been given judicial appointments and promotions by the government. However, this often appears to have less to do with pay than a severe outbreak of political favouritism on the part of Fine Gael and the Labour Party.
The apparent reluctance of some members of the judiciary to take the pay reductions that applied to all other public servants damaged their reputation and led to an unnecessary referendum to enforce the cuts. Nonetheless, the independence of the judiciary is one of the cornerstones of our democratic society and by and large the judges appointed down the years have maintained a high standard of decision making.
Given a historic resistance to reform, it is no surprise that the Government's Judicial Appointments Bill has caused such deep anxiety among serving judges. The Bill, if passed into law will delegate the appointment of judges to a commission with 11 members, including the chief justice, but it will have six lay members and a lay chair. The demand for a lay majority on the commission has come from Minister for Transport Shane Ross.
The Bar Council, which represents barristers, has expressed serious disquiet at the proposed new system and Chief Justice Susan Denham has voiced her concerns to the Taoiseach and Tánaiste Frances Fitzgerald. The Law Society, which represents solicitors, has taken a different view, mainly because so few solicitors have been appointed as judges in the higher courts.
The selection of judges by the government of the day has provided the State with a judiciary that generally commands respect. But the system is in need of reform with greater openness concerning selection, professional suitability and financial interests. Public confidence demands it.