Common good set aside again - Judging the judges

AT a moment when establishment institutions are losing moral authority apace, the opposition to structures to appoint or censure judges seems more like a half-forgotten siege at a dusty outpost in Victoria’s empire, rather than anything to do with securing a modern democracy where accountability is expected. 

Shane Ross has commendably refused to sanction judicial appointments until the establishment of a judicial council is finalised. He will have to be patient, as versions of this proposal have been danced around Leinster House for decades. The idea has, so far, been repelled by m’lords. Fine Gael are culpable in this stonewalling which serves a special interest group rather than the common good. The party is, as ever, a happy conspirator as its pathetic concessions on the Legal Services Regulation Act confirms.

Our judges must always be independent and secure enough to do their job but, in a world where a chap’s word no longer carries the authority it might once have, it is reasonable to ask judges, or prospective judges, to give the kind of details anyone applying for a mortgage must provide. We do not have public hearings over senior judicial appointments but that does not mean we should accept practices more like a Masonic rite than a public-good exercise in a democracy. It is down to Fine Gael to force the changes — and what a comforting reality that must be for our judges and our legal profession. Of the people, for the people, and by the people, indeed.