Announcements

Irelands Chief Justice, Mr Justice Donal O’Donnell today delivered a statement to mark the opening of the New Legal Year. Addressing a ceremony to mark the occasion, the Chief Justice told the hundreds of people gathered that, the ceremony was the second time the opening of the legal year has been marked in the Four Courts since Independence, the first being last year.

He said that it was important as over time, the various religious ceremonies which happen as well, “came to be accepted as the official opening, but there was a growing unease, which I must say I shared, of the intertwining in Ireland of religion with an important branch of the Government of the State which was established from the outset on republican principles and which has been, in name and reality, a republic since 1948”.

“If there is to be a ceremony marking an important milestone in the justice system, then it should, in a Republic such as this, take place in a public building in circumstances which illustrate the essential equality of every person irrespective of their beliefs”.

Accurate information on the Courts is vital in a democracy:

The audience of Judges, Lawyers, representatives of NGO’s and the wider justice community, and representatives of the Judiciary in Northern Ireland, Scotland and England were present, along with the Deputy President of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. They heard the Chief Justice say, “ a central feature of the administration of justice is that the public are entitled to expect a determination made on the merits, factual and legal, by a decision-maker, without fear or favour, solely by reference to facts and law. It is not that people without opinions are appointed judges. Rather, it is that all judges must set aside their fears, their affections and general opinions, and refrain from comment. That, public reticence in and of itself, is an important demonstration of that commitment.

“The way in which the media industry has developed both at national and local level, and the increasing influence of social media, might lead a regular media consumer to have noticed that the routine day to day reporting of court cases, which used to be a staple diet of newspapers and other media, has significantly decreased. This matters because research in our neighbouring and comparable jurisdictions shows that the more experience and knowledge the public has of the legal system, the greater their confidence in it. Constructive criticism is welcome, but there is also a corresponding obligation on those who would comment on or criticise the court system based on generalisations to recognise the limitations of the information available, and the significant constraints that are upon the courts in general, and individual judges in particular, and be fair”.

Changing Society, changing demands on courts, adapting to and resourcing change

Chief Justice O’Donnell went on the acknowledge that in society, “the pace of change, particularly in the last twenty or so years, has been extraordinary and dramatic. The population has increased significantly, become more diverse, law is becoming more elaborate and multi-layered, and litigation is correspondingly expanding, complex, and demanding. It is fair to say that, even if these changes were not occurring at their current pace, there would be significant challenges in seeking to administer justice in a system that was devised 100 years ago”.

Planning and Resources

The approach to judicial numbers, and indeed to facilities and other supporting infrastructure, changed little in the preceding hundred years, and the necessary frugality of the early years of the State had become ingrained in the State’s approach to resourcing the courts system, and indeed the justice system more generally. Ever since the EU Justice Scoreboard was first published in 2013, Ireland has had the dubious distinction of being consistently at the bottom of an EU member state league table in terms of numbers of judges per capita. Ireland also has the lowest number of judges in the 44 Council of Europe member states.

The final component to this perfect storm is that the courts system was particularly affected by the economies that were forced on this country as a result of the financial crisis. The Courts Service is embarking on a major Network Upgrade project later this year as part of its modernisation journey, which is well underway, in order to revamp networks across the country, but the large technical debt caused by an extended period of underinvestment and the age profile of many courthouses means that significant and consistent investment will be needed over the next decade to provide both the physical infrastructure and modern, digital services that an efficient court system requires, perhaps most obviously in this historic building itself.

Judicial Planning Working Group (JPWG) Report.

The JPWG report recommended the appointment of 44 judges to the District, Circuit, High Court, and Court of Appeal by the end of this year – that is 2024. These were to be appointed in two phases, the first phase of 24 and a subsequent phase of 20, subject to a satisfactory review. I am pleased to say that the report was accepted by the Government and the first phase of appointments has now been completed. .

The implementation of the recommendations of the JPWG has been a learning curve for all concerned. It has to be done in flight, as it were, while the courts system was still operating. In order to measure the effect of the additional judges, it is necessary to gather accurate and, in so far as possible, real-time data. However, that in turn involved constructing an entire system to collect and analyse the data on the disposal of work at each level of the court system, and indeed, in each court.

A second thing that is emerging from the process is that there is a direct correlation between judicial numbers and throughput, but judicial numbers are only one pinch point in what is an extended pipeline, all parts of which must function properly if work is to flow through the system to achieve maximum efficiency. Let us take the criminal justice system as an example. In order to deal with an increased number of cases, it is necessary that there be: an adequate supply of counsel to prosecute them; solicitors to instruct them; staff from the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions to supervise prosecutions; gardaí available to give evidence; probation services in some cases; Courts Service staff; and ultimately, prison spaces, to accommodate persons if they are sentenced at the end of the process. There is, in this regard, a need for a system wide analysis.

Resources do lead to results.

To take just some examples, which are representative of the impact of additional judicial numbers:

• The District Court saw the most protracted process of additional judicial numbers, which resulted in an 8% increase in the number of family law cases resolved, and a decrease in summonses awaiting scheduling by 83%.

• In the Circuit Court, family law waiting times were reduced, and court sittings were increased by 36% representing 457 additional sittings.

• In the Central Criminal Court, the number of resolved cases increased by 8%, waiting times for priority cases dropped by 18%, and defendants on bail saw a 40% decrease in waiting time.

Welcoming the new Judcial Appointments Commission

This year has seen the promulgation of the Judicial Appointments Commission Act after an Article 26 reference by the President to the Supreme Court, and a very protracted gestation, but I am pleased to say that the Minister has recently announced the appointment of four lay members of the Commission. There are a significant number of steps that need to be taken by the Commission, but it is, in my view, to be welcomed that for the first time the Commission will be required by statute to provide a maximum of three suitable candidates to the government for appointment, and that that selection must be made on merit.  There has been considerable debate on the structure of a commission, and I have contributed to that myself on a number of occasions. But the Commission is now about to be established, and I am firmly of the view that confidence in the judiciary commences with confidence in the appointment process. I look forward to working with both the lay members and judicial members of the Commission in that task.