Courts of the Republic of Ireland

The Board of the Courts Service, which oversees policy formulation and implementation, is headed by a chief executive officer.

The Constitution provides for only two institutions in which a serious crime may be tried in the absence of a jury: a military tribunal, and a special court established by law to try serious offences whenever this is considered to be in the interests of justice or public order.

According to Mark Garrett, director general of Ireland's Law Society, these reforms began to take place in the 1970s.

[4] In the following year, Justice Minister Simon Harris hoped that the addition of 24 judges would accelerate this process.

[5] In principle, all hearings are in camera and reporting is anonymous, restricted and issued quarterly by a single journalist.

The Government acts on the advice of the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board who submit a list of seven recommended candidates.

The Constitution originally mandated that judicial salaries could not be reduced as long as they remain in office.

However, in 2011 the Twenty-ninth Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland inserted a clause allowing which provides that: In O'Byrne v Minister for Finance (1959), the Supreme Court had previously found that an increase in income tax which reduced judicial pay did not violate the constitutional prohibition on the reduction of judicial pay.

A judge may be removed from office only for "stated misbehaviour or incapacity" and only if a joint resolution is adopted by both houses of the Oireachtas.

In 2004 a motion to impeach a Circuit Court judge, Brian Curtin, was launched in the Dáil, the first time such a move has been made.

This followed strong public reaction to his acquittal on charges of possession of child pornography, due to evidence seized by gardaí being ruled inadmissible, and the judge's refusal of a Government request to resign.

In November 2006, facing questioning by the committee, Judge Curtin resigned on health grounds, ending the impeachment process.

The jury found her guilty of deception by unanimous decision, the crime being committed while she was still a practising solicitor, a month before she was appointed to the judiciary.