Sir, - All matters of legal interpretation must begin with the words of the relevant law. Article 35.2 of the Constitution refers to judges' independence "in the exercise of their judicial functions".
Having quoted this provision, Mr O'Flaherty himself states in his letter to the Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality and Women's Rights (The Irish Times, May 6th) that it means that judges are not accountable "for their judicial functions". However, he then omits these crucial words in the next paragraph, and goes on to state that it would be constitutionally improper for him voluntarily to appear before the Oireachtas committee and that the Constitution does not permit him to help the committee further. His only attempt to address the question of "judicial functions" is where he states: "it is my opinion that any attendance . . . would amount to my rendering some account either in respect of matters alleged to touch on my judicial functions or the judicial functions of some other person." Mr O'Flaherty could voluntarily appear before the Committee and simply refuse to answer questions which touch on his or others' judicial functions, particularly as his own summary of the Chief Justice's report in his letter does not refer to any performance of his judicial functions. His letter makes an unjustified leap from citation of a law which prohibits questions relating to his judicial functions to the conclusion that it would be unconstitutional for him voluntarily to answer any questions.
In light of this, it will be difficult as a lecturer to remind students to begin with the words of the relevant law and not to lose sight of those words in reaching their conclusions. - Yours, etc.,
Darius Whelan, Law Department, University College, Cork.