[ad_1]
The Supreme Court faces an unprecedented crisis after the Chief Justice said that Supreme Court Justice Seamus Woulfe should resign over his handling of the controversy following his attendance at an Oireachtas golf society dinner. .
The judge told the Chief Justice that he will not resign over the controversy, in which 80 people attended a dinner at a hotel event in Clifden, Co Galway on August 19, a day after the government tightened the rules. Covid-19 restrictions on meetings.
Judge Frank Clarke told the judge in a meeting last Thursday that he should resign and reiterated that opinion in letters last week and yesterday.
In a letter last Thursday, the Chief Justice also said that the “unanimous opinion” of all members of the Supreme Court, including ex officio members, is that Justice Woulfe has caused “significant and irreparable” damage to the Supreme Court. court for the way it has handled the matter.
Justice Woulfe responded Monday that he would not resign, but would be willing to donate three months of his salary to a charity, would not serve as a Supreme Court Justice until February 2021, and would act as a Supreme Court Justice to help that court.
He said that he did not believe that any of the reasons given for his resignation “constitute even remotely substantial reasons or grounds for my resignation, much less constitute judicial misconduct.”
In his nine-page response, he said that despite former Chief Justice Susan Denham’s recommendation for an informal resolution process about his attendance at the Aug. 19 dinner at a hotel in Clifden, he and the President of the Supreme Court “have never met, formally or informally, to discuss the issues.”
The Chief Justice had “formed his personal opinion that I should resign without even discussing the change in the goalposts with me when, in the face of Mrs. Denham’s unequivocal opinion that my attendance at the dinner did not justify my resignation , he based his request for my resignation by how he had defended me ”.
In his reply on Monday, the Chief Justice said that “regrettably” it remains of the opinion that Justice Woulfe should resign.
On Monday night, the Supreme Court released letters exchanged between the Chief Justice and Justice Woulfe after meetings last week to address the controversy. Judge Woulfe had opposed the publication.
Last week’s meetings followed the October 1 release of a non-statutory review by Judge Susan Denham that expressed the opinion that Judge Woulfe had not violated any laws or knowingly violated any public health regulations by attending. to dinner.
However, Judge Denham expressed the opinion that she should not have attended the dinner and was not attentive to how a Supreme Court justice appeared to attend a celebratory dinner in a public place in the midst of a pandemic. She believed that requests for her resignation over the matter would be unfair and disproportionate and the Chief Justice should resolve the matter informally. The judge found the review not unpleasant, but the release of the transcripts of his interview with Judge Denham compounded the controversy.
In his letter of November 5, the Chief Justice concluded that Mr. Justice Woulfe’s approach to handling the problem in general “has increased, in my opinion, very substantially the damage caused to the Court, to the judiciary in general and , therefore, to the administration of justice “.
He referred to a telephone conversation between the two on August 21, when he expressed “my considerable concern that damage is being caused to the judiciary and that public opinion is being shaped by reasonable people and not by a media frenzy.” Focusing on “narrow and technical issues instead of acknowledging serious public concern and consequent damage to the Court has only increased the gravity of the situation,” he said.
He said more serious problems arise from aspects of the transcripts of the judge’s interview with Judge Denham and elements of the correspondence between the two men since the delivery of their report.
That account appeared to show that the judge “did not appreciate the genuine public concern for the event and its attendance, but continued to reduce the controversy to a media frenzy.”
In fact, your statement that you did not understand why you were apologizing at the time you issued your limited apology would now significantly devalue any additional apologies. There would be legitimate public skepticism about the authenticity of such an apology ”.
The Chief Justice noted that the judge had commented negatively on the government’s handling of the public health crisis and had made critical comments to the Taoiseach and many other officials that “created additional genuine controversy.”
“It is an important and long-standing aspect of the reciprocal respect that State institutions must have for each other that judges do not get involved or give rise to controversial matters that especially involve the other powers,” he said.
He also criticized what he said was the judge’s implication that some of his colleagues may have prejudged him.
The “reasonable response” of a large number of people to the transcripts of the judge’s interview by Judge Denham has “caused even greater damage to the judiciary than their attendance at the Clifden event,” he said.
His opinion, and the unanimous opinion of all members of the Court, including ex-officio members, that the cumulative effect of all these matters “has been to cause very significant and irreparable damage” to the Court and to the relationship within it “essential for the proper functioning of a collegiate court.
“It is not part of my role to ask you, much less tell you, to resign. The resignation is and can only be for the judge himself. Unfortunately, however, I think I must make clear my personal opinion that, to avoid continued serious harm to the judiciary, you must resign. ”
He noted that the judge said he would not resign and also noted that he had offered to donate a month’s salary to charity.
The Chief Justice said his own opinion had been, if things had not worsened after Denham’s review, that the judge should not sit down until February 2021 and should resign or return his salary until then.
In his letter of 9 November, the Chief Justice, while welcoming some aspects of the judge’s response, said that he “regrettably” continued to feel “that he should resign” to maintain public confidence in the Supreme Court, the the judiciary in general and the administration of justice.
He also noted that the judge had reaffirmed his point of view “that he will not resign.”
[ad_2]