The Gazette 1984

159 / 322

INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY OF IRELAND
GAZETTE
Vol. 78 No. 6 July/August 1984
In this issue Comment
Comment 151
Crossword 169
Presentation of Parchments 172
D ' a r y 175
Medico-Legal Society 177
Executive Editor: Mary Buckley
Editorial Board: William Earley, Chairman
John F. Buckley
Gary Byrne
Charles R. M. Meredith
Michael V. O'Mahony
Maxwell Sweeney
Advertising: Liam O hOisin, Telephone 305236
Printing: Turner's Printing Co. Ltd., Longford
The views expressed in this publication, save where
other-wise indicated, are the views of the contributors
and not necessarily the views of the Council of the
Society.
The appearance of an advertisement in this publication
doés not necessarily indicate approval by the Society for
the product or service advertised.
Published at Blackhall Place, Dublin 7.
DURING the passage of the Criminal Justice Bill
through the Dáil the question of the method of
appointment of the Judiciary was raised.
Such discussions normally focus on the danger of
political appointments to the Bench but on this occasion
some deputies advocated that there should be a training
period for judicial appointees.
It is commonplace that Judges at all levels are
appointed at the last possible moment, presumably due to
the parsimony of t h e ' Department of Finance in
endeavouring to ensure that judicial salaries are payable
for the minimum period. A barrister or solicitor may be in
the hurly-burly of practice one day and be sworn in and
sitting on the Bench two days later. While it is one of the
cornerstones of the Common Law system that Judges
should only be appointed from among the practising
profession, it has to be said that the 'instant' creation of
Judges, if it ever was, may no longer be appropriate. The
fact that it has not been traditional to require Judges to
undergo any course of pre-appointment training or
induction is not of itself a justification for continuing this
practice.
Twenty years ago most solicitors, at least, tended to be
general practitioners, used to carrying on a certain
amount of District Court practice. With the increase in
the size of practices and increasing specialisation, partly
brought about by the introduction of the Criminal Legal
Aid Scheme, an increasing number of solicitors,
otherwise well-qualified to be appointed to the Bench,
will not have had recent day to day familiarity with
District Court practice and, in particular, with the
application of the rules of evidence or the strict burden of
proof in criminal cases. It may also be the case that a
number of such appointees might not have sufficient
experience of the Family Law cases which are now dealt
with in the District Court.
Other Common Law jurisdictions have found it
advisable to require newly appointed Judges to undergo
training or induction programmes before they are
permitted to take charge of trials. Even at the High Court
level, there is increasing use in Britain of Deputy High
Court judges, acting on a temporary and part-time basis.
Whether in a small legal community such as ours it would
be feasible to adopt this practice is doubtful. Even if it is
not, it should be possible to arrange that training and
induction programmes be made available for newly
appointed Judges, with a view to ensuring that the high
standards of our judiciary, particularly at the District
Court level, are not eroded by the appointment of worthy
but not necessarily the most suitably experienced Justices.
•
151