The report of a committee set up to consider judicial ethics is likely to recommend establishing on a statutory basis a judicial body to deal with the disciplining, education and training of judges.
The committee was set up in April 1999, in the wake of the Sheedy affair, which led to the resignations of two judges, Mr Justice Hugh O'Flaherty and Mr Justice Cyril Kelly.
It consists of the Chief Justice, Mr Justice Ronan Keane; the Presidents of the High and Circuit Courts, Mr Justice Fred Morris and Mr Justice Esmond Smyth; the former chairwoman of the working group on a Courts Commission and a member of the Supreme Court, Ms Justice Susan Denham; the chairman of the Law Reform Commission, Mr Justice Declan Budd; and the Attorney General, Mr Michael McDowell.
The committee was asked to consider the sixth and final report of the Courts Commission; the position in other common law jurisdictions, such as Canada, New South Wales, the US and New Zealand; consult and receive submissions from other interested bodies; and prepare a report on the setting up of a judicial body which would, among other things, handle complaints about judicial conduct.
Such complaints could come from other judges, legal practitioners or members of the public.
The sixth report of the working group, concluded before the Sheedy affair, considered the issue of judicial accountability and suggested an independent committee controlled by the judiciary and chaired by the Chief Justice, which could establish a code of ethics and have procedures for dealing with complaints.
The report from the judicial committee is likely to draw heavily on the experience of the Judicial Commission of New South Wales. This provides for a filtering process for complaints, leading eventually, if thought necessary, to an inquiry.
An issue likely to prove contentious will be non-judicial representation on such a body. It is likely there will be some lay representation on it to satisfy the demand for openness and accountability.
However, the demands for representation for the other branches of the legal profession, barristers and solicitors, are less likely to be met. As many complaints against judges, especially in the lower courts, come from solicitors, the Law Society in particular would like representation on any body dealing with complaints.
An editorial in the Law Society Gazette last December said: "It is vital that the proposed judicial council enjoys the full confidence of the practising legal profession, and this can only occur if some solicitors and barristers, as well as non-lawyers, are full members of the judicial council."
If this is not present in the report it is likely the Law Society will lobby the Government to have it included. However, given the constitutional separation of powers, the Government may find it difficult to depart from the recommendations in the report from a committee set up by the judiciary itself.
The body proposed in the report is likely to also deal with the issue of judicial education and development. A judicial studies institute already exists but it functions informally.