Efforts to make the judiciary more reflective of society in general are "virtually non-existent", a new report has concluded.
The report by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) says little has changed since a review of the judiciary in 1969 found that the majority of judges were male, middle-class and from an urban setting.
The high fees payable for courses in King's Inns and the fact that barristers must undertake a year's apprenticeship for which many of them do not get paid combine to make training at the bar difficult for people on low income, it said.
The ICCL also cited a Competition Authority report critical of the fact that King's Inns and the Law Society of Ireland had a monopoly on professional training making it difficult for those who do not have the means to finance a full-time legal education.
It said the judiciary was unrepresentative of society because the legal profession itself was unrepresentative of society.
It recommended that the balance should be redressed by more access programmes for university law courses and by providing additional state financial support for barrister and solicitor traineeships for minority and under-represented students.
However, speaking at the launch of Justice Matters: Independence, Accountability and the Irish Judiciary, retired Supreme Court judge Mr Justice Donal Barrington said he was "a little bit taken aback" by suggestions that judges come from a privileged class.
He said he had been a scholarship student who had no background in the law. He also cited the example of the former chief justice Liam Hamilton who had paid for his legal education while working as a clerk.
"There may be some truth in it, but it is not entirely true to say that judges are from a privileged sect," he said.
"When I was young only one person in eight got a secondary school education. It is not surprising that judges should be drawn from that very small group in society, but now we have free secondary and third level education, so the education process will resolve this issue," he said.
The ICCL report also recommended the setting up of a judicial council composed of judges and lay people with the power to hold judges to account for their decisions and for serious misconduct in their personal lives.
However, the report author Tanya Ward said a judicial council would not need the power to dismiss a judge as the Supreme Court had already ruled in the Judge Brian Curtin case that a joint Oireachtas committee had the power to do it.
The ICCL report also said there was a lack of transparency in the making of judicial appointments. It said governments currently do not have to explain any judicial appointments and there is no legal sanction for a government that appoints a political supporter above somebody better qualified for the position.
