Counsel criticises procedure to remove Curtin

THE proposed procedure for the removal of Circuit Court Judge Brian Curtin from office is unconstitutional because it could lead to the judge being removed without any “finding” or “adjudication” being made on the allegation that he accessed child pornography on his computer, the Supreme Court was told yesterday.

Mr John Rogers SC argued that without a finding of "stated misbehaviour" and a subsequent Oireachtas resolution that this misbehaviour required the judge's removal from office, he cannot be constitutionally removed from office.

Mr Rogers said the procedure set up by the Oireachtas to inquire into the Judge's alleged misbehaviour involved a Select Committee gathering and presenting to the Oireachtas contradictory testimony as to whether the Judge had knowingly accessed child pornography on his computer. Its report could only contain transcripts of evidence and associated audio visual material and the Committee could not make findings of fact. That report would then go to members of the Oireachtas who would have no opportunity to assess witnesses and their credibility before debating and voting on a motion to remove the judge.