We know so little. The human mind is still a mystery. We construct hypotheses to carry us over these unknown terrains, the hypothesis being intended to carry the endorsement of the communal wisdom. Inevitably, it represents the conventional wisdom, but that may be the price we pay in setting up human institutions like a court.
This presumed-to-be-correct âknowledgeâ? often appears in the exercise of judicial discretion. We expect the judge to apply those fine judgments for which no prescribed rules can be laid down in advance.
Far below this level of deployed skill or judgment, lies the expectation that the judge will follow fair procedures; rules of court, or the provisions of the Constitution. If we are disappointed in this expectation we look to Judicial Review for a remedy.
If this happens frequently that fact will become obvious from the state of the High Court judicial review list. Would this not be a matter of proper concern to a judicial disciplinary tribunal?
Serial Judicial Review applications do not seem to be an adequate institutional response to such a problem. Of course, the State might decline to meet the costs of these cases ((and consequentially the Judge will be liable)) but, it appears more appropriate that a Judicial complaints body should deal with this.
When will Ireland get such a body?