Help clear the backlog in our courts

IT IS said that justice delayed is justice denied; an old but valid criticism of a courts system that doesn’t work properly in the interests of the citizen.

That is why people should vote yes to the establishment of a new Court of Appeal. Passing this referendum will speed up the appeals process from the High Court as a new court will be set up at a level between the High Court and the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land.

At present, there are long delays in having appeals heard by the Supreme Court and the new Court of Appeal would play a crucial role in clearing the large backlog that currently exists in the Supreme Court system.

A new Court of Appeal would act as a filter between the High Court and Supreme Court and directly deal with the majority of appeals from the High Court. In recent years there has been a huge rise in the number of appeals but the size of the Supreme Court has remained the same.

The result is a huge backlog of appeal cases before the Supreme Court, which are clogging up the system and creating unacceptable delays.

Currently, if you win or lose a civil case in the High Court and it is appealed to the Supreme Court, there is a four-year delay. That is a delay that many businesses — both big and small — cannot afford.

For criminal cases the delay is now up to 18 months. This is simply unacceptable as it effectively means that a person protesting their innocence must wait in jail for 18 months for a decision. On the other side, victims and their families are denied finality during that time.

It has been estimated that an appeal launched today by a citizen might not be heard until 2018 given the backlog in the Supreme Court. There are more appeals lodged every year than cases dealt with so the backlog gets greater and greater.

If this referendum is passed, the Court of Appeal will hear most of the appeals which are currently heard by the Supreme Court. It will handle virtually all appeals from decisions of the High Court and appeals from other courts if laws are passed to provide for this.

In general, the decision of the Court of Appeal will be final. In some cases, there may be a further appeal from the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court and there may be some direct appeals from the High Court to the Supreme Court but, crucially, this will only happen when the Supreme Court chooses to hear the appeal on the basis that the decision involves a matter of public importance or the interests of justice require such an appeal.

This Government has also taken other measures to improve the situation — adding two new members of the Supreme Court and introducing legislation to increase the jurisdiction of the circuit court so that fewer cases have to be heard in the High Court in the first instance.

A Court of Appeal, which already exists in most jurisdictions, is the long-term solution to modernising our courts system and to reducing current unacceptable delays. Furthermore it was recommended by an independent working group which was set up to consider a Court of Appeal in 2006. Since this group reported in 2009, the problem has got even worse.

Finally, the referendum also proposes to remove the “one-judgment rule” when a decision is being made on whether or not a law is constitutional. At present, there must be at least five judges of the Supreme Court sitting when a decision is being made.

However, the Constitution currently states that the decision of the court in these cases must be given by one judge, meaning it is not known if any of the judges disagreed with the decision or why they do so. This can often inhibit the development and clarification of the law, as the Constitutional Review Group has previously pointed out.

If the referendum is passed, the “one-judgment rule” will still remain where the President refers a bill which has been passed by the Oireachtas but not yet signed to the Supreme Court for a decision. Both the proposed change, and the retention in the case of references by the President, was recommended by the Report of the Constitutional Review Group in 1996.

The Government has taken heed of the reports of the working group and the Constitutional Review Group and is now taking action by putting it to the people to decide. I’m urging people to vote yes on Friday so that we can press ahead with this vital reform and gradually begin to unblock the unacceptable delays in our courts system.

* Michael McNamara is a Labour TD for Clare. He is also a barrister.