Sir, – The (apparent) refusal by the Minister for Justice to allow an independent commission to examine the reduction of judges’ remuneration (assuming a successful referendum) is a backward step in our democracy (Front page, July 4th).
There can at times be a thin line in the separation of powers under the Constitution, but in such circumstances there is a duty upon the Minister responsible to ensure that the line is not transgressed. If the Minister for Justice refuses to permit an independent commission to decide on the issues of remuneration, he is putting in danger the constitutional principle of separation of powers. He is treading on thin ice and would be advised to tread carefully. This principle has served the country well and should not be cast aside at the whim of one person. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Surely the thing is as broad as it is long: if the Government caves in to the bewigged pressure group to continue to exempt judges from the taxes and levies which apply to all other high (and low) officials of the State, then the Government would be treating the judiciary more favourably than it treats others. Would this not amount to objective pressure on the judges to support the Government’s side, in an evenly balanced case?
And, as regards the judges’ “calling spirits from the vasty deep” by speaking about the reaction of international human rights groups, surely, if we are worried about that, we should be far more concerned about international reaction to the fact that, here, it is still the Government alone which selects judges (albeit out of a short-list of seven candidates found qualified by the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board).
Worse, the only machinery for disciplining judges is the 17th-century idea of resolutions in both Houses of the Oireachtas. Over the past decade or two, all other states subject to the rule of law have established aptly-designed 21st-century systems for these delicate tasks. Even in the United Kingdom, these functions have been taken from the lord chancellor. In Ireland, change is long overdue (as we can see from recent episodes in judicial history) and, if a constitutional amendment is required, now is an opportune time to have it. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Strange that m’luds never complained about judicial independence when their salaries were going up. – Yours, etc,