Sir, – I believe that I would be eminently suitable for a position on a judicial appointments board.
I have read To Kill a Mockingbird, my favourite film is And Justice for All and I have watched every episode of The Good Wife, Boston Legal, Law and Order, The Practice, Ally McBeal, Perry Mason and Rumpole of the Bailey!
While I await Shane Ross's response, I will watch another episode of Judge Judy to keep my expertise honed in readiness. – Yours, etc,
EILEEN CASEY,
Dublin 15.
Sir, – Do we know what mechanism is proposed for the selection of lay members and the lay chair? What is the basis for presuming that lay members will not themselves have political agendas? I am nervous of the idea that non-specialists (ie lay people) should be in the majority in selecting nominees for judicial appointment.
Presumably criteria for selection will include a candidate’s integrity, honesty and competence, ie their knowledge of the law. Those in the best position to assess a candidate’s competence should, as in any specialism, be themselves specialists in the area.
The analogy to jurors (lay people) arriving at a verdict does not seem to me correct. Jurors are to arrive at a verdict based on the specific facts presented in court, while the judge directs them on pertinent points of law they must consider.
Rushed legislation has proved to be problematic in the past.
I am not aware of a burning urgency in relation to this matter that would justify rushing it and risking the enactment of bad legislation. – Yours, etc,
M McCROHAN,
Monkstown,
Co Dublin.