COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2021 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland Accompanying the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2021 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2021-07-20
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Ireland, administrative transparency, coronavirus disease, corruption, democracy, epidemic, independence of the judiciary, infringement of EU law, political rights, rule of law

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 20.7.2021  SWD(2021) 715 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2021 Rule of Law Report   Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland Accompanying the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2021 Rule of Law Report   The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2021) 700 final} - {SWD(2021) 701 final} - {SWD(2021) 702 final} - {SWD(2021) 703 final} - {SWD(2021) 704 final} - {SWD(2021) 705 final} - {SWD(2021) 706 final} - {SWD(2021) 707 final} - {SWD(2021) 708 final} - {SWD(2021) 709 final} - {SWD(2021) 710 final} - {SWD(2021) 711 final} - {SWD(2021) 712 final} - {SWD(2021) 713 final} - {SWD(2021) 714 final} - {SWD(2021) 716 final} - {SWD(2021) 717 final} - {SWD(2021) 718 final} - {SWD(2021) 719 final} - {SWD(2021) 720 final} - {SWD(2021) 721 final} - {SWD(2021) 722 final} - {SWD(2021) 723 final} - {SWD(2021) 724 final} - {SWD(2021) 725 final} - {SWD(2021) 726 final} - {SWD(2021) 727 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT 

The  Irish  justice  system,  characterised  by  a  high  level  of  perceived  independence,  is 
undergoing  important  developments.  A  new  draft  law  aims  at  reforming  the  system  for 
judicial  appointments  and  promotions,  alleviating  certain  previous  concerns.  However,  the 
reform would continue to leave broad discretion to the Government, given there is no ranking 
of the candidates and the Government is not bound by this list, although its decisions must be 
published.  It  is  important  that  this  reform  guarantees  judicial  independence,  taking  into 
account  European  standards.  A  disciplinary  regime  is  being  established  to  improve  judges’ 
accountability and the Judicial Conduct Committee is preparing draft guidelines on conduct 
and  ethics  and  a  complaints’  procedure.  In  accordance  with  the  Constitution,  the  final 
decision  on  dismissal  of  judges,  which  is  only  envisaged  in  cases  of  misbehaviour  or 
incapacity, remains a prerogative of the Parliament, which could raise concerns as regards the 
politicisation  of  the  procedure.  The  recently  established  Judicial  Council  has  continued  its 
work  on  a  number  of  guidelines.  Reflections  are  ongoing  on  limiting  legal  costs  and 
improving  legal  aid  schemes,  which  could  improve  access  to  justice.  Measures  are  being 
taken  to  address  challenges  in  relation  to  digitalisation,  the  low  number  of  judges  per 
inhabitant and the length of proceedings.  

Ireland  is  extensively  reviewing  its  anti-corruption  and  anti-fraud  structures  as  well  as  its 
strategies  to  prevent,  investigate  and  adjudicate  economic  crimes  and  corruption.  The 
Government has committed itself to introduce new anti-corruption and anti-fraud structures, 
new legislation to provide for preliminary trial hearings, and to  amend the Criminal Justice 
(Corruption  Offences)  Act  2018.  Key  challenges  in  Ireland’s  capacity  to  deter  and  punish 
corruption  remain  due  to  limited  resources  and  institutional  fragmentation.  Prevention  of 
corruption and promotion of integrity measures are in place, but challenges remain as regards 
enforcement, in particular on asset disclosure, lobbying and revolving doors. Concerns have 
been  raised  that  the  Standards  in  Public  Office  Commission,  as  the  supervisory  authority 
managing the disclosure of interests and tax clearance  regimes of the public office holders, 
may not be adequately resourced. A capacity review is planned to examine the issue. 

The broadcast media regulator (Broadcasting Authority of Ireland) is expected to undergo a 
major  reorganisation  in  the  framework  of  the  new  draft  law  on  online  safety  and  media 
regulation, aiming at transposing the revised Audiovisual Media Services Directive. The new 
draft  law  is  planned  to  be  adopted  by  the  end  of  2021.  The  recent  developments  aimed  at 
increasing  transparency  in  the  sector  include  making  available  the  database  on  media 
ownership, expected to  be regularly updated. Amendments to the Defamation Act, foreseen 
for adoption in the coming months, are expected to have a positive impact on the operation of 
journalists. The Government has set up an advisory Future of Media Commission to launch a 
dialogue on new policy measures and possible long-term actions to support the sector.  

As  regards  checks  and  balances,  the  ordinary  legislative  procedure  continued  to  be  used  to 
legislate to address the COVID-19 pandemic, but concerns were raised regarding the limited 
parliamentary  oversight  over  ministerial  measures.  While  Ireland  has  a  well-developed 
legislative procedure, there has  recently been substantial  recourse to  possibilities to  shorten 
discussions  in  Parliament.  The  Irish  Human  Rights  and  Equality  Commission  continues  to 
carry out its work effectively and was re-accredited in June 2021. Ireland has a vibrant and 
diverse civil society but funding restrictions on NGOs continue to raise some concerns. There 
are plans to tackle these concerns in the context of the ongoing electoral reform.  

1 

 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM  

Ireland is  a common law jurisdiction, whose judiciary is divided into a civil and a criminal 
branch. The court system comprises a court of final appeal (the Supreme Court), a Court of 
Appeal,  and  courts of first  instance which include a High Court with  full jurisdiction in  all 
criminal and civil matters and courts of limited jurisdiction: the Circuit Court and the District 
Court  organised  on  a  geographical  basis.  The  Special  Criminal  Courts1  are  non-jury  courts 
and  deal  with  paramilitary,  subversive  and  organised  crime  cases.  Moreover,  a  number  of 
specialised  tribunals2  operate  in  different  areas,  including  workplace  relations3.  A  Judicial 
Council was established in 20194. Judicial appointments are made by the President of Ireland, 
acting on the advice of the Government. The Judicial Appointments Advisory Board is tasked 
with the selection of suitable candidates for appointment. The prosecution service is not part 
of the judicial branch. The Attorney General is the legal adviser to the Government. The legal 
profession  has  two  types  of  lawyers  –  solicitors,  represented  by  the  Law  Society,  and 
barristers,  largely  represented  by  the  Bar  of  Ireland.  The  Legal  Services  Regulatory 
Authority, an independent body established in 2016, is Ireland’s national statutory regulator 
for both branches of the legal profession.  

1   The  Offences  Against  the  State  Act  1939  provides  for  the  establishment  of  Special  Criminal  Courts.  A 
Special  Criminal  Court  now  known  as  Special  Criminal  Court  No.  1  is  operating  since  1972.  Special 
Criminal  Court  No.  2  was  established  is  operating  since  2016.  A  Special  Criminal  Court  sits  with  three 
Judges and no jury. The Government appoints a panel of High Court, Circuit Court and District Court Judges 
to  sit  in  the  Special  Criminal  Courts.  There  are  currently  nineteen  judges  on  the  panel.  Cases  involving 
terrorism and organised crime offences are automatically brought before a Special Criminal Court for trial. 
Other offences are brought before or sent for trial when the Director of Public Prosecutions certifies that the 
ordinary Courts are inadequate to secure the effective administration of justice and the preservation of public 
peace and order. An appeal against a conviction or sentence by the Special Criminal Courts can be brought 
the Court of Appeal. 

2   Including  a  Labour  Court,  which  has  sole  appellate  jurisdiction  in  all  disputes  under  employment  rights 
enactments. While the Labour Court is not a court of law, when exercising this jurisdiction the Labour Court 
is  involved  in  the  administration  of  justice.  The  Court  also  carries  a  jurisdiction  under  the  Industrial 
Relations  Acts  1946  –  2015.  In  exercise  of  that  jurisdiction  it  operates  as  an  industrial  relations  tribunal, 
hearing both sides in a case and then issuing a Recommendation setting out its opinion on the dispute and the 
terms on  which it  should be settled. Recommendations  made  by the  Court concerning the investigation of 
disputes  under  the  Industrial  Relations  Acts  1946  –  2015  are  not  binding  on  the  parties  concerned.  The 
Court's determinations under the Employment Rights enactments are legally binding. 

3   In  April  2021,  the  Irish  Supreme  Court  delivered  a  judgment  (Zalewski  v.  Adjudication  Officer  and  the 
Workplace  Relations  Commission)  on  the  constitutionality  of  the  workplace  relations  commission,  where 
most disputes are considered by an adjudication officer, considering also the role of the Labour Court which 
is  a  tribunal.  The  majority  held  that  the  exercise  of  powers  by  Adjudication  Officers  pursuant  to  the 
Workplace  Relations  Act,  2015  was  the  administration  of  justice  within  the  meaning  of  Article  37  of  the 
Constitution. In doing so, it rejected a challenge to the validity of certain sections of the 2015 Act and the 
Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 as amended. However, the Supreme Court also determined that two aspects of 
the 2015 Act are incompatible with the Constitution: the requirement for all hearings before an Adjudication 
Officer to be held otherwise than in public and the absence of the provision for the administration of an oath, 
or  any  possibility  of  punishment  for  giving  false  evidence.  The  Supreme  Court  also  made  certain 
observations  concerning  the  need  for  enhanced  independence  on  the  part  of  adjudication  officers  in 
circumstances where their actions amount to the administration of justice, albeit of a limited nature, so as to 
be permissible under Art. 37 of the Constitution. 

4   2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p. 2.  

2 

 
                                                 
Independence  

The perceived independence of courts and judges among the general public and among 
companies  remains5  high.  The  level  of  independence  of  courts  and  judges  is  perceived  as 
‘fairly’  or  ‘very  good’  by  73%  of  the  general  population  and  by  77%  of  companies6.  This 
high level of perceived judicial independence has been stable since 2016. 

The recently established Judicial  Council has continued its work to issue a number of 
guidelines, including through carrying out research and drafting7. A modern programme 
of education and training for judges has commenced, aided by the appointment of a serving 
judge  as  Director  of  Judicial  Studies.  The  Council  of  Europe’s  Group  of  States  against 
Corruption  (‘GRECO’)  welcomed  the  establishment  of  the  Judicial  Council  in  line  with  its 
previous  recommendations8.  The  Judicial  Council  is  carrying  out  research  to  guide  its 
drafting  of  Sentencing  Guidelines.  The  Personal  Injuries  Guidelines,  which  set  general 
guidelines for the amounts to be awarded or assessed in personal injury claims, were adopted 
by the Council in March 2021 and came into effect in April 2021, once the legislation entered 
into force. In the implementation of such guidelines due regard should be given to the respect 
of judicial independence9.  

A  new  draft  law  on  the  appointment  and  promotion  of  judges  is  under  preparation. 
After  the  lapsing  of  the  2017  draft  law  on  judicial  appointments  at  the  end  of  the  previous 
parliamentary  term,  the  new  Government  presented  a  new  General  Scheme10  in  December 
202011. The draft law is expected to be tabled in Parliament in the third quarter of 2021. 

The  composition  of  the  envisaged  Judicial  Appointments  Commission  has  been 
changed.  The  new  General  Scheme  provides  for  the  establishment  of  a  Judicial 
Appointments  Commission  composed  of  nine  members  to  replace  the  current  Judicial 
Appointments Advisory Board (JAAB)12. The Commission will include the Chief Justice (as 
chair), two judges nominated by the Judicial Council (one having been a practising solicitor 
and  one  having  been  a  practising  barrister),  one  court  president  (being  the  president  of  the 
court in respect of which the Commission is to recommend persons for appointment) and four 
lay  members  (three  of  which  are  to  be  selected  in  open  competition  by  the  Public 
Appointments Service, and one of which will be nominated by the Irish Human Rights and 

5   2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p. 3. 
6   Figures 48 and 50, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard. The level of perceived judicial independence is categorised 
as  follows:  very  low  (below  30%  of  respondents  perceive  judicial  independence  as  fairly  good  and  very 
good); low (between 30-39%), average (between 40-59%), high (between 60-75%), very high (above 75%). 

7   2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p. 4-5. 
8   GRECO  Fourth  Evaluation  Round  –  Evaluation  Report,  para.  124;  GRECO  Fourth  Evaluation  Round  – 

Second Interim Compliance Report, paras. 25-28.  

9   Council of Europe standards require the respect of judicial independence not only  from  influences outside 
the  judiciary,  but  also  from  within.  For  example,  according  to  the  Venice  Commission,  the  practice  of 
guidelines  adopted  by  the  Supreme  Court  or  another  highest  court  and  binding  on  lower  courts  is 
problematic  as  regards  internal  independence  (Venice  Commission  opinion  (CDL-AD(2010)004-e,  para. 
70).  

10   Before a draft law (a Bill) is finalised, a “General Scheme” of the Bill may be published, and this is often 

called the heads of the Bill. 

11   Department of Justice (2020), General Scheme of the Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2020. 
12   2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p. 3. The JAAB is made up 
of the five court presidents, the Attorney General, a representative from both the Law Society and the Bar 
Council, and three lay members appointed by the Minister for Justice. 

3 

 
                                                 
Equality  Commission)13.  The  Attorney  General  will  sit  in  the  Commission  in  an  ex-officio 
non-voting capacity. The composition of the envisaged Commission does not provide, for a 
clear  majority  of  judges  chosen  by  their  peers14,  although  it  takes  into  account  certain 
concerns  raised  as  regards  the  previous  plans  for  a  lay  majority  and  a  lay  chair15.  The 
membership,  even  if  in  non-voting  capacity,  of  the  Attorney  General,  who  is  also  the 
Government’s  chief  legal  advisor  and  sits  at  cabinet  meetings16,  might  raise  concerns  as 
regards  the  independence  of  the  Commission  from  the  Government17,  as  reported  by  the 
Human Rights and Equality Commission18 and the Law Society19. The General Scheme also 
provides for a Senior Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee to recommend persons for 
appointment  as  Chief  Justice,  President  of  the  Court  of  Appeal  and  President  of  the  High 
Court.  This  Committee  will  be  composed  of  the  Chief  Justice,  one  lay  member  and  the 
Attorney  General.  Therefore,  the  Attorney  General  would  have  a  significant  role  in  the 
appointments  of  the  most  senior  positions  within  the  judiciary,  which  could  also  raise 
concerns  of  independence.  It  is  important  that  the  final  reform  guarantees  judicial 
independence,  in  line  with  EU  law  and  taking  into  account  European  standards20  and  is 
carried out  in  full consultation  with  relevant  stakeholders21 and the Venice Commission. In 
particular,  according  to  Council  of  Europe  recommendations,  such  an  independent 
appointment body should be composed in substantial part from the judiciary and it should be 
authorised  to  make  recommendations  or  express  opinions  which  the  relevant  appointing 
authority follows in practice22. 

The envisaged procedure for judicial appointments and promotions raises concerns.  In 
the  current  system,  for  first-time  judicial  appointments,  the  JAAB  recommends  to  the 
Minister  for  Justice  at  least  seven  candidates  for  each  vacancy23.  Shortlisted  candidates  are 

13   The Law Society and the Bar of Ireland called for the inclusion of representatives of solicitors and barristers 
in the Commission.  Law Society (2021), Submission to the Joint Oireachtas  Committee  On Justice  on the 
General Scheme of the Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2020. Council of The Bar of Ireland (2021) 
Submission to the Department of Justice on the General Scheme of the Judicial Appointments Commission. 

14   Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2020)006, para.19.  
15   2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p. 3. 
16   The Attorney General has limited prosecution responsibilities. Those responsibilities are mostly hold by the 

Director of Public Prosecutions.  

17   Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2020)006, para. 21-22. 
18   Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (2021), Submission to the Minister for Justice on the General 

Scheme of the Judicial Appointments Commission p. 14. 

19   Law Society (2021), Submission to the Joint Oireachtas Committee On Justice on the General Scheme of the 
Judicial  Appointments  Commission Bill 2020, p.6.  The Bar of Ireland considered that  where the  Attorney 
General has recused her/himself as s/he is an applicant for such judicial office, an alternate should sit on the 
Committee. Council of The Bar of Ireland (2021), Submission to the Department of Justice on the General 
Scheme of the Judicial Appointments Commission. 

20   Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, paras 46- 47. 
The  European  Court  of  Justice  has,  in  the  context  of  judicial  appointments  made  by  the  executive  branch 
upon a request from a council for the judiciary, indicated that for such council to contribute to making the 
process  more  objective,  it  should  be  sufficiently  independent  of  the  legislative  and  executive  and  of  the 
authority to which it is required to deliver a judicial appointment proposal. Judgment of the Court of Justice 
of 19 November 2019, AK, joined cases C- 585/18, C- 624/18 and C- 625/18, paras. 137-138.  

21   Opinion  no.10(2007)  of  the  Consultative  Council  of  European  Judges  (CCJE)  to  the  attention  of  the 
Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the Council for the Judiciary at the service of society, 
of  23  November  2007,  para  87;  CCJE  Opinion  No.  23  (2020)  The  role  of  associations  of  judges  in 
supporting judicial independence, para. 47. 

22   Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, para. 47. 
23   Section 16 of the Courts and Court Officers Act 1995. Where fewer than seven persons inform the Board of 
their wish to be appointed to a judicial office or where the Board is unable to recommend to the Minister at 

4 

 
                                                 
 
not  ranked in  order of preference, and the Government is  not  bound to  select  from  the list. 
Promotions of judges are made by the President of Ireland on the advice of the Government 
and are not subject to the procedure conducted by the JAAB. Concerns were raised as regards 
the wide discretion left to the executive power in the current system24. The General Scheme 
provides that all judicial appointments and promotions must be subject to the envisaged new 
procedure,  which  is  capable  of  strengthening  judicial  independence.  The  General  Scheme 
provides that the Commission would present five unranked candidates to the Government25, 
thereby better limiting the discretion of the Government compared to the current system of a 
list of seven candidates. However, the 2017 draft law provided for an even greater limitation, 
proposing a list of only  three ranked candidates.  The number of candidates to be submitted 
and the lack of ranking foreseen by the new General Scheme provides the Government with a 
broad  discretion  as  regards  judicial  appointments,  which  has  raised  criticism26.  This 
discretion  is  further  amplified  by  the  possibility  for  the  Government  to  select  an  applicant 
who is  not  in the list prepared by the Commission,  without the need to give reasons27. The 
Government considers that this discretion is required by the constitutional provisions stating 
that judges are appointed by the President28. Nonetheless, it is important that this reform takes 
into account Council of Europe recommendations relating to the need for the executive power 
to follow in practice the recommendations by independent authorities29.  

least seven persons, the Board shall submit to the Minister the name of each person wishing to be considered 
for appointment and the Board shall recommend to the Minister for appointment such of those persons as it 
considers suitable. 

24   2020  Rule  of  Law  Report,  country  chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Ireland,  p.  3.  An  outstanding 
recommendation  of  GRECO  stressed  the  need  to  review  the  current  system  for  selection,  recruitment, 
promotion and transfers of judges with a view to target the appointments to the most qualified and suitable 
candidates  in  a  transparent  way,  without  excessive  influence  from  the  executive  powers.  GRECO  Fourth 
Evaluation  Round  –  Evaluation  Report,  para.  132;  GRECO  Fourth  Evaluation  Round  –  Second  Interim 
Compliance Report, para. 34. 

25   8  recommendations  in  instances  where  there  are  2  vacancies;  and  11  recommendations  where  there  are  3 

vacancies. 

26   Council of The Bar of Ireland (2021) Submission to the Department of Justice on the General Scheme of the 
Judicial  Appointments  Commission,  p.3-4.  Irish  Human  Rights  and  Equality  Commission  (2021), 
Submission to the Minister for Justice on the  General Scheme of the Judicial  Appointments Commission,: 
‘the Commission recommends that if [Judicial Appointments Commission] is to have a meaningful role in 
providing  an  independent  process,  then  the  number  of  candidates  that  are  recommended  to  Government 
should  be  significantly  reduced’,  p.25.  Also,  the  Commission  recommends  that  the  proposed  legislation 
explicitly requires that all vacancies are advertised in a public and accessible manner (p. 21). 

27   See, in this context, CJEU judgment of 20 April 2021, Case C‑ 896/19, Repubblika, ECLI:EU:C:2021:311, 
para  71, in  which the requirement in Malta for the Prime  Minister to give reasons  when submitting to the 
President  of  the  Republic  the  appointment  of  a  candidate  not  put  forward  by  the  Judicial  Appointments 
Committee  established  under  the  Constitution,  was  considered  relevant  for  considering  that  power  of  the 
Prime  Minister,  inasmuch  as  it  is  exercised  only  in  quite  exceptional  circumstances,  not  to  give  rise  to 
legitimate doubts concerning the independence of the candidates selected. 

28   Irish Constitution, Article 35(1): ‘The judges of the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, the High Court and 

all other Courts established in pursuance of Article 34 hereof shall be appointed by the President’. 

29   Recommendation  CM/Rec(2010)12  of  the  Committee  of  Ministers  to  member  states  on  judges: 
independence, efficiency and responsibilities, para. 47, foresees: ‘However, where the constitutional or other 
legal  provisions  prescribe  that  the  head  of  state,  the  government  or  the  legislative  power  take  decisions 
concerning the selection and career of judges, an independent and competent authority drawn in substantial 
part from the judiciary (without prejudice to the rules applicable to councils for the judiciary contained in 
Chapter  IV)  should  be  authorised  to  make  recommendations  or  express  opinions  which  the  relevant 
appointing authority follows in practice’. 

5 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
Work  is  ongoing  on  establishing  a  disciplinary  regime  for  judges,  while  Parliament 
remains  in  charge  of  removing  judges.  The  Judicial  Conduct  Committee  of  the  Judicial 
Council,  which  was  established  in  2020  to  consider  complaints  in  relation  to  judicial 
misconduct,  is  drafting  the  Judicial  Conduct  Guidelines,  the  procedures  for  informal 
resolution  of  complaints  and  on  admissibility  and  operation  of  the  complaints  regime.  The 
complaint  procedure  should  be  ready  to  be  commenced  by  summer  202230.  Despite  the 
progress  in  this  regard,  the  current  lack  of  formal  disciplinary  procedures  for  judges  was 
raised  as  concern31,  including  by  civil  society32.  Therefore,  the  forthcoming  guidelines  and 
procedures  could  lead  to  improve  the  accountability  of  judges;  it  is  important  that  they 
preserve  judicial  independence  in  line  with  EU  law  and  taking  into  account  Council  of 
Europe  recommendations33.  Parliament  remains  in  charge  of  deciding  on  the  removal  from 
office of judges and retains its margin of discretion in that regard, which could raise concerns 
about the politicisation of the process, even if this process has never been engaged34. 

Quality  

The  number  of  judges  remains  low  and  the  resources  available  for  the  training  of 
judges appear limited.  The number of judges per inhabitant remains the lowest in the EU, 
which could also affect the efficiency of the Irish justice system35. While the Government has 
committed  to  review  the  numbers  and  types  of  judges  needed  to  ensure  the  efficient 
administration of justice over the next five years36, more immediate measures might address 
concerns  also  raised  by  stakeholders37.  The  budget  per  capita  for  the  justice  system  has 
consistently increased in the last years and is among the highest in the EU, while the budget 
as a percentage of GDP has stagnated and remained below EU average38. As regards judicial 
training39,  in  2020,  a  part-time  Director  of  Judicial  Studies  (who  is  a  serving  judge)  was 
appointed. It has not been possible to expand the training programme, although progress has 

30   The  statutory  deadline  for  the  Board  of  the  Judicial  Council  to  receive  the  draft  Guidelines  on  judicial 
conduct  and  ethics  is  of  30  June  2021  provides  and  the  deadline  for  adoption  of  these  Guidelines  by  the 
Judicial Council is 30 June 2022. 

31   2020  Rule  of  Law  Report,  country  chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Ireland,  p.  4.  An  outstanding 
GRECO recommendation refers to the need to formally establish a code of conduct for judges and to connect 
such an instrument to an accountability mechanism. GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round, para. 146; GRECO 
Fourth Evaluation Round – Second Interim Compliance Report, para. 44.  

32   Contribution  from  the  Irish  Council  for  Civil  Liberties  for  the  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report  ‘EU  2020: 
Demanding  on  Democracy,  Country  &  Trend  Reports  on  Democratic  Records  by  Civil  Liberties 
Organisations Across the European Union – Ireland’, p. 5.  

33   Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of  Ministers of the Council of Europe, para. 69. An 
outstanding GRECO recommendation refers to the need to formally establish a code of conduct for judges 
and to connect such an instrument to an accountability mechanism. GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round, para. 
146; GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round – Interim Compliance Report, para. 43. 

34   2020 Rule of  Law Report,  country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p. 3.  Also, the  scope of 
judicial review available in cases of disciplinary sanctions or removal from office is limited to the lawfulness 
of the procedure only, without a possibility to challenge its substance. Council of Europe standards requiring 
the  respect  of  judicial  independence  not  only  from  undue  influences  outside  the  judiciary,  but  also  from 
within. See also footnote 9.  

35   Figure 32, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
36   Department of Justice (2021), Justice Plan 2021, action 80. 
37   Contribution from the Council of the Bar of Ireland for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 8.  
38   Figure  30,  2021  EU  Justice  Scoreboard.  The  methodology  of  the  Justice  Scoreboard  measures  the 

investment into the Justice system as a percentage of the GDP.  

39   In its Second Interim Report in the Fourth Evaluation Round, GRECO considered that the recommendation 
on  institutionalising  and  adequately  resourcing  a  dedicated  induction  and  in-service  training  for  while 
respecting the independence of the judiciary was still not complied with. 

6 

 
                                                 
recently been made in securing the administrative support necessary to facilitate developing 
that programme40. A survey of judicial training needs was carried out in 202141.  

The reflection  on the  costs of  litigation and the legal aid system continues42 and could 
lead  to  the  improvement  of  access  to  justice.  The  Review  of  the  Administration  of  Civil 
Justice43  was  published  in  October  2020  and  makes  recommendations  with  a  view  to 
improving access to civil justice, promoting early resolution of disputes, reducing the cost of 
litigation, creating a more responsive and proportionate system and ensuring better outcomes 
for court users. The Review recommended the drawing up of non-binding guidelines on legal 
costs44. The Government has launched an evaluation of this proposal, including whether legal 
costs should be fixed in a binding manner45. Recommendations on this matter are expected by 
the end of 2021. The Government has also committed to start a review of the civil legal aid 
scheme this year. These initiatives could help addressing concerns relating to access to justice 
and, in particular, the civil legal aid system46. As regards criminal legal aid, the Government 
plans  to  transfer  the  operation  of  the  scheme  to  the  Legal  Aid  Board47.  While  the  criminal 
legal  aid  scheme  is  generally  considered  as  well-functioning,  the  Bar  of  Ireland  has  raised 
concerns  about  the  low  level  of  remuneration  provided  for  barristers  under  the  scheme48. 
Strengthening  the  legal  aid  systems  and  limiting  legal  costs  would  appear  important  to 
improve  access  to  justice.  Moreover,  the  promotion  of  and  incentives  for  using  alternative 
dispute resolution methods could be further improved49.  

The Legal Services Regulatory Authority is taking further measures to tackle remaining 
barriers  in  the  legal  services  market.  The  Authority  plans  to  introduce  before  the  end  of 
2021 the framework for Legal Partnerships (which can include barrister-barrister partnerships 
and barrister-solicitor partnerships). The Authority also intends to revisit the introduction on 
multi-disciplinary  practices  (involving  legal  practitioners  and  other  professions  –  e.g. 
architects,  accountants)  following  on  from  the  introduction  of  Legal  Partnerships.  In  2020, 
the  Authority  published  a  report  which  considered  whether  the  professions  of  solicitor  and 
barrister  should  be  unified.  The  report  concluded  that  there  was  no  evidential  basis  for 
recommending  unification  of  the  professions  but  undertook  to  revisit  the  issue  once  other 
reforms  under  the  Act  had  bedded  down50.  The  Authority  also  published  a  report  on  legal 
practitioner  education  and  training,  recommending  reforms  to  define  the  competence  and 
standards required to practice as a solicitor or barrister. It also recommends the establishment 
of  a  statutory  framework  to  accredit  existing  providers  of  legal  practitioner  education  and 
training, as well as allowing new providers to be accredited to provide professional training 
for solicitors and barristers51. The Authority is now working with the Department of Justice 
on  the  implementation  of  these  recommendations.  The  Authority  is  also  undertaking  a 

40   Input from Ireland for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 12.  
41   Ibid.  
42   2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, pp. 5-6. 
43   Review Group Report on the Administration of Civil Justice, Chairperson: The Hon. Mr. Justice Peter Kelly, 

Former President of the High Court.  

44   Review of the Administration of Civil Justice, Report, p. 322.  
45   Ireland, Justice Plan 2021, action 83. 
46   2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, pp. 5-6.  
47   Ireland, Justice Plan 2021, action 88. 
48   Contribution from Bar of Ireland for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 8.  
49   Figure 27, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
50   Legal Services Regulatory Authority (2020), Greater than the Sum of Its Parts? Consideration of Unification 

of the Solicitors’ Profession and Barristers’ Profession. 

51   Legal Services Regulatory Authority (2020), Setting Standards: Legal Practitioner Education and Training. 

7 

 
                                                 
research project on potential barriers that may exist to commencing a career as a barrister or 
solicitor, to be issued before the end of 2021. In 2020, the Authority took over the regulation 
of advertising by legal practitioners, with the introduction of new regulations52. It would be 
important for the Authority to assess whether and how the measures taken have contributed to 
limit legal costs and enhancing access to justice.  

Work  continues53  in  order  to  remedy  existing  gaps  in  the  digitalisation  of  the  justice 
system. The Courts Service has issued  a long-term strategy54, which aims to  better support 
access  to  justice.  The  modernisation  programme’s  priorities  include  eFiling,  a  case 
management system, and putting in place the infrastructure to facilitate eCourts. During the 
COVID-19  pandemic,  a  Virtual  Courtroom  programme  has  allowed  for  more  than  2 200 
virtual  court  sessions  since  March  2020.  Remote  courts  continue  to  operate  across  all 
jurisdictions, extensively, in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal and the High Court, and 
they are planned to continue operating in the future. Despite the measures of 2020 allowing 
for  the  increased  use  of  remote  hearings  in  civil  matters  and  in  criminal  appeals,  Ireland 
scores below EU average as regards procedural rules allowing digital technology in courts in 
civil/commercial,  administrative  and  criminal  cases55.  Ireland  also  scores  below  average  as 
regards  the  use  of  digital  technology  by  courts  and  prosecution  service56,  electronic 
communication tools in courts57, digital solutions to conduct and follow court proceedings in 
criminal  cases58  and  online  access  to  published  judgments  by  the  general  public59.  Further 
digitalisation of the Irish justice system is therefore necessary to remedy existing gaps, and 
also to allow for the gathering of data on the length of proceedings according to Council of 
Europe European Commission for the efficiency of justice (CEPEJ) methodology60.  

The  Government  has  announced  a  review  covering  the  functioning  of  the  Special 
Criminal Courts. The United Nations61 and civil society62 have long called for considering 
the  abolition  of  the  Special  Criminal  Court,  which  was  established  in  1972  to  deal  with 
terrorism  and  organised  crime  cases,  or  to  strengthen  the  procedure  of  the  Court  to  ensure 
respect  of  the  right  to  fair  trial.  In  February  2021,  the  Government  appointed  a  group  to 
review the Offences Against the State Acts. The review group’s remit covers the functioning 
of the Special Criminal Court63.  

52   Legal Services Regulatory Authority (2020), Press Release— LSRA takes over the regulation of advertising 

by legal practitioners. 

53   2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, pp. 6-7.  
54   Irish Court Service (2020), The Courts Service Long-Term Strategic Vision to 2030: Supporting Access to 

Justice in a modern, digital Ireland. 
55   Figure 40, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
56   Figure 41, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
57   Figure 42, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
58   Figure 5, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
59   Figure 6, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
60   CEPEJ data feed the EU Justice Scoreboard.  
61   UN Human Rights Committee (2014), Concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of Ireland.  
62   Irish  Council  for  Civil  Liberties  (2020),  Untenable  in  a  democracy:  ICCL  renews  call  for  abolition  of 

Special Criminal Court. 

63   Input of Ireland for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 17.  

8 

 
 
 
                                                 
Efficiency 

Challenges relating to the length of proceedings have aggravated64. The average length of 
proceedings  in  the  High  Court  in  2019  was  785  days,  an  increase  of  around  35  days  from 
2018.  In  particular,  the  length  of  commercial  proceedings  continued  to  increase,  by  around 
220 days from 2018 to 2019. By contrast, length of proceedings at circuit and district courts 
decreased  in  2019  compared  to  2018,  following  an  increase  the  previous  year.  Length  of 
proceedings at the Court of Appeal increased by around 110 days between 2019 (1220 days) 
and 2018 (1101 days). Between 2018 and 2019, the length of criminal proceedings increased 
by  around 120 days  at  circuit court  and by  around 100 days  at  the  central  criminal  court65. 
The Review of the Administration of Civil Justice made recommendations to reduce delay in 
and  the  time  of  proceedings66.  A  Criminal  Procedure  draft  law  providing  for  pre-trial 
hearings,  which  could  provide  for  a  faster  and  more  efficient  court  process  for  certain 
offences, was signed into law on 24 May 202167.  

The Government plans to propose a compensation scheme for cases of excessive length 
of  court  proceedings  before  the  end  of  2021.  This  is  required  by  a  European  Court  of 
Human Rights judgment, whose execution is still under enhanced supervision by the Council 
of Europe’s Committee of Ministers68.  

II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

In  Ireland,  the  investigation  of  corruption  is  the  responsibility  of  An  Garda  Síochána,  the 
national  police  and  security  service.  The  Anti-Corruption  Unit  within  the  Garda  National 
Economic  Crime  Bureau  is  exclusively  responsible  for  the  investigation  of  foreign  bribery 
and responsible for the investigation of cases of domestic bribery and corruption of national 
importance.  The  Anti-Corruption  Unit  acts  as  a  centre  of  excellence  for  the  investigation, 
prevention  and  disruption  of  bribery  and  corruption.  The  Police  carries  out  criminal 
investigations in the fight against corruption. A new unit focused on investigating corruption 
within  the  police  force  began  operations  in  November  2020.  A  new  Investigation 
Management System (IMS) has recently been developed and is currently being trialed by the 
national  police  and  security  service.  The  Standards  in  Public  Office  Commission  (SIPO)  is 
responsible for enforcing the Electoral Acts, the Ethics Acts and the Regulation of Lobbying 
Act 2015. 

The perception among experts and business executives is that the level of corruption in 
the  public  sector  remains  relatively  low.  In  the  2020  Corruption  Perceptions  Index  by 
Transparency  International,  Ireland  scores  72/100  and  ranks  7th  in  the  European  Union  and 
20th globally69. This perception has been relatively stable70 over the past five years71. 

64   2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p. 7.  
65   Input of Ireland for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 16. 
66   Department of Justice (2020), Review of the Administration of Civil Justice, Report, pp. 398-399.  
67   Criminal Procedure Bill 2021.  
68   2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p.8.  
69   Transparency  International,  Corruption  Perceptions  Index  2020  (2021),  pp.  2-3.  The  level  of  perceived 
corruption is categorised as  follows: low (the perception among experts and business executives of public 
sector  corruption scores  above  79);  relatively  low  (scores  between  79-60),  relatively  high  (scores  between 
59-50), high (scores below 50). 

9 

 
                                                 
Following a comprehensive review, the government is planning revisions of the criminal 
legislative framework to strengthen the effectiveness of the fight against corruption. The 
2018 criminal justice law72 provides a single consolidated legislation. The law in relation to 
bribery  and  corruption  has  been  updated  and  consolidated  by  the  2018  law  and  it  is  now  a 
criminal  offence  to  fail  to  report  bribery  and  corruption  offences  to  the  police.  Corruption 
offences also have an extraterritorial effect under the Act for foreign corruption if it is proven 
that  part  of  the  relevant  conduct  outside  the  State,  would  be  an  offence  if  occurred  in 
Ireland73. As reported last year, an in-depth assessment on the effectiveness of the authorities 
in  the  fight  against  economic  crime  and  corruption  was  carried  out74.  The  so-called 
“Hamilton  review”75  was  published  in  December  2020.  Following  this  assessment,  the 
Ministry of Justice has identified priorities that can be implemented in the shorter term, such 
as  the  enactment  of  the  draft  law  on  criminal  procedure,  included  in  the  current  legislative 
programme  for  enactment.  Further  priorities  include  strengthening  the  law  in  the  area  of 
public  sector  ethics  and  amending  legislation  to  address  situations  of  possible  breaches  of 
former  members  of  the  Parliament  (Houses  of  the  Oireachtas)  who  may  have  contravened 
their  obligations  under  the  Ethics  Acts.  They  also  include  amending  the  criminal  justice 
legislation  to  allow  for  standalone  search  warrants  that  will  allow  the  police  to  demand 
passwords to electronic devices owned or controlled by persons subject to arrest warrants76.  

Ireland  is  currently  reviewing  its  national  anti-corruption  structure.  One  of  the  main 
recommendations  of  the  Hamilton  review  is  the  establishment,  on  a  permanent  basis,  of  a 
cross-sectoral advisory council to coordinate and lead a holistic approach to economic crimes 
and corruption. To address the lack of a national strategy for combating economic crime and 
corruption  and  the  multiple  authorities  with  anti-corruption  competences,  the  Hamilton 
review also recommended the development of a multi-annual strategy and an accompanying 
action plan77.  

The  competences  and  responsibilities  for  anti-corruption  policies  as  well  as  for 
detecting,  investigating  and  prosecuting  corruption  are  shared  between  different 
specialised  law  enforcement  bodies.  The  Garda  National  Economic  Crime  Bureau 
(GNECB)  and  its  specialised  Anti-Corruption  Unit  in  particular  are  responsible  for  the 
investigation of all corruption offences, including foreign bribery. While the police has been 
recently  allocated  substantial  resources78,  there  has  not  been  a  commensurate  increase  in 

70   In 2015 the score was 75, while, in 2020, the score is 72. The score significantly increases/decreases when it 
changes  more  than  five  points;  improves/deteriorates  (changes  between  4-5  points);  is  relatively  stable 
(changes from 1-3 points) in the last five years. 

71   The Eurobarometer data on corruption perception and experience of citizens and businesses as reported last 
year is updated every second year. The latest data set is the Special Eurobarometer 502 (2020) and the Flash 
Eurobarometer 482 (2019). 

72   Criminal Justice (Corruption Offences) Act of 2018. 
73   Criminal Law (Extraterritorial Jurisdiction) Act 2019, Section 3. 
74   2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p. 10. 
75   Department of Justice (2020), Review Group Report on structures and strategies to prevent, investigate and 

penalise economic crime and corruption. 

76   Department of the Taoiseach (2020), Programme for Government: Our Shared Future. 
77   Department  of  Justice  (2021),  Hamilton  Review  Group  Implementation  Plan.  An  Implementation  Plan  to 

implement the recommendations was published in April 2021. 

78   An Garda Síochána has allocated a budget of EUR 1.952 billion for 2021. This level of funding is enabling 
ongoing recruitment of Garda members and  staff. As a result, Garda numbers are  now  over 14 600 Garda 

10 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
 
resources for the Office  of the  Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP), although increased 
resourcing of other parts of the system (police, courts, judges) has an impact on the workload 
of  the  ODPP,  as  increased  police  numbers,  detections  and  investigations  create  more 
prosecution  files  for  the  ODPP.  Within  the  police,  a  new  anti-corruption  unit  to  deal  with 
internal  corruption  investigations  also  became  operational.  ODPP  focuses  exclusively  on 
prosecuting  offences  submitted  by  the  investigatory  authorities  and  has  no  prevention 
function. ODPP has a Special Financial Crime Unit, which the Anti-Corruption Unit liaises 
directly with in relation to relevant corruption cases. The Police is a member of Transparency 
International  Ireland’s  “Integrity  at  Work”  initiative  and  seek  to  promote  a  supportive 
working  environment  for  reporting  concerns  of  wrongdoing.  The  Anti-Corruption  Unit, 
GNECB operates a free-phone bribery and corruption confidential reporting line. 

Limited  resources  remain  a  challenge  for  the  Anti-Corruption  Unit  within  the  Garda 
National Economic Crime Bureau (GNECB).  The GNECB currently has 74 investigators 
(12  of  whom  are  on  temporary  transfer),  18  Civilian  Staff  and  three  Forensic  Accountants. 
The Anti-Corruption  Unit within the GNECB is  currently  comprised only  of  three persons, 
one detective sergeant and two detective investigators. A competition to select detectives for 
allocation  to  the  GNECB  has  recently  been  completed  and  the  Anti-Corruption  Unit  will 
receive  one  additional  staff  member.  The  Anti-Corruption  Unit  uses  resources  within 
GNECB when conducting major operations and has a close working relationship with other 
national  units79.  The  Hamilton  review  noted  the  lack  of  resources  of  the  Anti-Corruption 
Unit, and recommended to ensure that additional resources are given to the GNECB, as well 
as to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The recommendation specific to the 
latter included additional prosecutors along with a seconded specialist in digital forensics and 
a seconded forensic accountant80. According to the GNECB data, the unit currently has nine 
ongoing corruption investigations, out of which three investigations concern foreign bribery 
of foreign public officials.  

The  analysis  of  electronic  evidence  in  corruption  cases  poses  some  challenges.  An 
Investigation Management System (IMS) has recently been developed and is currently being 
trialed.  This  system  will  standardise  all  investigations  and  will  record  all  actions  replacing 
paper based systems currently in use. According to the authorities, the collection of electronic 
evidence,  including  mobile  phone  data,  computer  data,  cloud  data  and  data  from  social 
networks is a further challenge81. The Anti-Corruption Unit does not currently have access to 
a  tool  that  enables  the  effective  and  efficient  examination  of  this  data.  This  results  in  the 
examination of electronic data taking up a significant amount of investigative resources and 
resulting in significant delays to investigations. 

Prevention  of  corruption  and  promotion  of  integrity  measures  are  in  place,  however 
challenges remain as regards the enforcement of rules. The general rules and procedures 

members  and  3  000  Garda  staff  nationwide.  Budget  2021  provides  for  the  recruitment  of  up  to  620  new 
Gardaí and an extra 500 Garda staff. 

79   Such as the Criminal Assets Bureau, the Garda National Cyber Crime Bureau, the Garda National Bureau of 
Criminal Investigation and the Garda National Drugs and Organised Crime Bureau. Detectives attached to 
the Anti-Corruption Unit are members of An Garda Síochána. 

80   Department of Justice (2020), Review Group Report on structures and strategies to prevent, investigate and 

penalise economic crime and corruption. 

81   Written contribution received by the Garda National Economic Crime Bureau in the context of the country 

visit to Ireland. 

11 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
concerning  asset  disclosure  are  set  out  in  the  Ethics  Acts82.  Interests  to  be  disclosed  and 
evidence  on  compliance  must  be  submitted  to  the  Standards  in  Public  Office  Commission 
(SIPO)  by  all  members  of  both  Houses  of  the  Parliament,  the  Attorney  General  and 
appointees to senior office in public bodies. SIPO continues to oversee the implementation of 
legislation, but challenges have been reported83 as the interests to be disclosed do not include 
liabilities  (mortgages,  loans,  etc.)  and  the  public  disclosures  only  concern  members  of  the 
Parliament.  SIPO  has  no  remit  to  investigate  actions  of  either  office  holder  or  civil  servant 
when actions are taken after leaving office.  

Some shortcomings remain with regard to the capacity to enforce the rules on lobbying 
and  revolving  doors.  The  Regulation  of  Lobbying  Act  2015  created  a  requirement  for  a 
register of lobbyists. The Second Statutory Review of the Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015 
was published in February 202084. The Register, which is a web-based system85, is overseen 
by SIPO. There are currently over 2 100 organisations and individuals who have  registered 
on  the  Register.  SIPO  has  certain  enforcement  powers  under  law,  including  the  ability  to 
carry  out  investigations  where  it  believes  a  person  may  have  committed  a  contravention. 
Furthermore,  it  has  the  power  to  bring  and  prosecute  specific  offences,  including  where  a 
person who is lobbying has not registered86. The Regulation also provides for a one year post-
employment “cooling off” period, during which  particular public officials cannot  undertake 
specific  lobbying  activities.  Apart  from  the  Regulation,  there  are  references  to  post-
employment restrictions in the Code of Conduct for office holders and the Civil Service Code 
of  Standards  and  Behaviour.  Working  within  limited  resources  (which  it  shares  with  the 
Office of the Ombudsman), SIPO is not able to pro-actively pursue compliance with codes of 
conduct.  As  regards  revolving  doors,  post-employment  restrictions  are  included  in  the 
Regulation  of  Lobbying  Act  2015,  the  Code  of  Conduct  for  office  holders  and  the  Civil 
Service  Code  of  Standards  and  Behaviour.  However  SIPO  lacks  the  necessary  powers  to 
monitor irregularities.  

Harmonised conflict of interest rules are still pending. A review of the ethics legislation is 
currently  being  undertaken  by  Government,  after  the  Public  Sector  Standards  draft  law 
201587,  which  would  have  enhanced  the  existing  framework  for  identifying,  disclosing  and 
managing conflicts of interest and minimising corruption risks, lapsed with the dissolution of 
the last parliament88. Prevention of corruption and promotion of integrity measures have been 
identified among the priorities in the 2020 Programme for Government. The Group of States 
against Corruption (GRECO) has noted in this respect that the establishment of a uniform and 
legal  framework  for  ethical  conduct  of  members  of  parliament  and 
consolidated 

82   The Ethics in Public Office Act 1995 and the Standards in Public Office Act 2001 are cited together as the 

Ethics Acts. The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform has responsibility for these Acts.  

83   Information received in the context of the country visit to Ireland. 
84   The Review includes a number of recommended further actions for the Standards Commission to consider, 
most of which relate to requests received for greater clarity, guidance and education. Department of Public 
Expenditure  and  Reform  (2020)  Second  Statutory  Review  of  the  Regulation  of  Lobbying  Act  2015.  The 
third statutory review of the 2015 Act is required to commence by 1 September 2022. 

85   See www.lobbying.ie. 
86   Department  of  Public  Expenditure  and  Reform  (2020)  Second  Statutory  Review  of  the  Regulation  of 

Lobbying Act 2015. 

87   Public Sector Standards Bill 2015. 
88   2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p. 10.  

12 

 
                                                 
improvements of the asset declaration regime have been impacted by the lapsing of the 2015 
draft law89. 

As  regards  the  measures  to  address  and  mitigate  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  public 
procurement appears to be a high-risk area for bribery and corruption. Currently, four 
of the Anti-corruption Unit’s ongoing investigations relate to procurement, and assistance has 
been provided in three other cases. The GNECB also ran a ‘Fraud Awareness Week’ where 
there  was  regular  media  exposure  on  fraud  prevention.  COVID-19  procurement  fraud 
featured as a topic during this campaign. 

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM  

In Ireland, freedom of expression is protected by the Constitution, which requires the State to 
guarantee the protection of fundamental rights, including freedom of expression and freedom 
of  the  press90.  A  major  legislative  overhaul  of  the  media  law  is  expected  to  be  finalised  in 
2021  in  the  context  of  the  transposition  of  the  revised  Audiovisual  Media  Services 
Directive91. 

The  legal  framework  for  the  independent  media  regulator  is  being  revised.  The  new 
regulatory  framework,  to  be  established  by  the  upcoming  draft  law  on  online  safety  and 
media regulation92, envisages the dissolution of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI) 
and  the  assignment  of  all  its  functions  to  the  new  Media  Commission.  The  Media 
Commission  will  also  be  granted  with  new  compliance  and  sanction  powers,  including  the 
power to seek the imposition of administrative financial sanctions, in view of overseeing the 
new framework for online services. The Media Commission will include a maximum of six 
commissioners,  appointed  following  an  open  competition,  conducted  by  the  Public 
Appointments Service. There are currently nine members of BAI, five of whom are appointed 
by the Government on the nomination of the Minister for Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, 
Sport and Media93. The new Commission will be governed by an executive chairperson with 
a managerial role. The General Scheme of the draft law proposes to uphold the funding of the 
regulatory  activities  of  the  new  Media  Commission  through  the  introduction  of  industry 
levies, similarly to the current funding scheme of BAI94. The General Scheme confirms that 
the  Commission  is  to  be  independent  in  the  performance  of  its  functions.  The  new  legal 
framework  is  expected  to  be  adopted  by  the  end  of  2021.  Similarly  as  in  2020,  the  2021 
Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM)95 assessed the risks to the independence and effectiveness 

89   GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round – Second Interim Compliance Report, p. 9. 
90   Irish Constitution, art. 40. 
91   Directive  2010/13/EU  on  the  coordination  of  certain  provisions  laid  down  by  law,  regulation  or 
administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual 
Media  Services  Directive)  in  view  of  changing  market  realities.  Ireland  was  ranked  in  12th  place  in  2021 
World Press Freedom Index (7th among  the EU Member States), one place  up compared to 2020,  when  it 
ranked 13th. Reporters without borders, Ireland. 

92   The Online Safety and Media Regulation Bill will aim to transpose in the Irish legal framework the revised 

Audiovisual Media Services Directive.  

93   The current staff and functions of BAI will be overseen by the Commissioner for Broadcasting. 
94   In  order  to  support  the  news  media  sector  during  the  COVID  19  pandemic,  the  Minister  for 
Communications,  Climate  Action  and  Environment  requested  BAI  to  consider  waiving  the  levy  on 
independent radio stations for the first six months of 2020. According to 2019 Annual Report, BAI accepted 
this request, pursuing a number of cash flow management and budgetary strategies. 

95  2021 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Ireland, p. 10. 

13 

 
                                                 
of the Irish media regulator to be at low level, highlighting that the existing legal safeguards 
effectively narrow the scope for potential external interference. 

Ireland has a well-established system of self-regulatory bodies in the news media sector. 
The  framework  is  based  on  the  activities  of  the  Press  Council  of  Ireland  (PCI)96  and  the 
Office of the Press Ombudsman (PO), and covers newspapers (print and online), magazines 
and online-only news publications that are members of the Press Council. According to the 
2020 annual report, last year 346 complaints were submitted to the PCI and 25 were analysed 
by the PO.97 This constitutes a raise in comparison to 252 complaints submitted in 201998. In 
2021, the PO has already examined ten cases99.  

Various measures have been put in place to ensure the provision of open and pluralistic 
broadcasting  services  in  Ireland100.  A  searchable  database101  covering  the  ownership 
information regarding Irish-owned media businesses was launched on 11 November 2020. It 
will be subjected to regular updates every six months. Under the Competition and Consumer 
Protection Act 2014, the Minister for Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media is 
competent to assess the effects of ownership transactions (mergers) in the media sector on the 
media  plurality  in  Ireland102.  In  addition,  every  three  years,  BAI  is  required  to  undertake  a 
review  of  ownership  of  media  businesses  in  Ireland,  focusing,  in  particular,  on  changes  in 
ownership and their implications for media plurality. The first two reviews were conducted in 
2015  and  in  2018.  In  preparation  for  the  upcoming  review,  planned  for  2021103,  BAI 
organised  a  public  consultation  for  stakeholders,  which  ran  until  30  April  2021.  These 
transparency measures104 are important, taking into account the high level of concentration in 
the Irish media sector, especially at local level105. The 2021 MPM refers to a lack of data to 
be able to assess news media concentration106. 

The  Government  took  some  measures  to  mitigate  the  impact  of  the  COVID-19 
pandemic. As reported by Reporters without Borders, many regional titles found themselves 

96   2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p. 12.  
97   Press Council Annual Report 2020. 
98   Ibid. 
99   Press Council of Ireland, Decisions of the Press Ombudsman.  
100  As stipulated in section 25 of the Broadcasting Act 2009. This principle is expected to be confirmed in the 

upcoming Online Safety and Media Regulation Bill – Head 10.  

101 The database was designed and maintained by staff at the DCU School of Communications. The project is an 
initiative of the BAI in the context of its statutory requirement to conduct research relating to the plurality of 
the media in Ireland. The database is available here: mediaownership.ie 

102  In  the  period  2018-20,  all  proposed  media  mergers  were  approved.  See:  gov.ie  -  Media  Mergers 

(www.gov.ie) 
According  to  the  2014  Competition  and  Consumer  Protection  Act,  such  a  report  should  describe  the 
ownership and control arrangements for undertakings carrying on a media business in Ireland, describe the 
changes  to  the  ownership  and  control  arrangements  of  such  undertakings  over  the  previous  3  years,  and 
analyses the effects of such changes on plurality of the media in Ireland. 

104  As  reported  in  by  Study on  the  implementation  of  the new provisions  in  the  revised Audiovisual 
Media Services Directive  in  Ireland,  media  merger  decisions  and  all  other  media  ownership  decisions  are 
reported  publicly  by  the  relevant  bodies,  whether  the  Department  of  Communications  (BAI)  or  the 
Competition Commission and are reported in the national and regional media. 

105 According to Reporters without Borders – Ireland “Independent News and Media (INM) controlled much of 
the  daily  and  Sunday  newspaper  market,  while  broadcasting  continued  to  be  dominated  by  the  semi-state 
company RTE - itself facing mounting financial burdens that threaten its continued stability”. 

106 Lack of data on revenue and audience concentration for all media markets appears to be an issue. See Media 

Pluralism Monitor, country report for Ireland, p. 11.  

14 

 
                                                 
on  the  brink  of  financial  collapse  in  2020107.  A  number  of  print  freesheets  also  suspended 
their operations as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, and only an increase in state 
advertising,  related  to  addressing  Covid-19  measures,  prevented  some  radio  stations  from 
ceasing their operation108. Also,  the State’s Pandemic Unemployment  Payment scheme was 
open to all employees, including journalists, which helped to alleviate the economic impact 
of  the  COVID-19  pandemic  on  journalists.  Freelancers  could  also  benefit  from  certain 
financial support as self-employed workers109. 

The  Government  is  reflecting  on  the  future  of  the  media  sector.  The  Irish  government 
decided  to  launch  a  discussion  on  possible  long-term  actions  to  support  the  media  sector, 
establishing  an  independent  Future  of  Media  Commission110  in  October  2020.  The 
Commission’s  reflections  have  focused  in  particular  on  the  challenges  faced  by  all  media 
actors  with  regards  to  changing  revenue  streams,  audience  behavior  and  new  technical 
models of media consumption. The Commission organised between 12 December 2020 and 8 
January  2021  a  public  consultation  which  resulted  in  over  800  written  submissions  from 
stakeholder groups and the general public. The Commission is currently engaging in a series 
of thematic dialogues in view of producing a report and recommendations by summer 2021.  

Discussions on amending the journalists’ protection framework are ongoing.  Following 
the announcement of the plans to revise the 2009 Defamation Act111, the Irish Government is 
finalising a statutory review. A new Scheme of Defamation could be presented by the end of 
2021.  As  highlighted  by  stakeholders112,  the  current  regime  enables  to  impose  a 
disproportionately  high  amount  of  damages  for  defamation,  which  can  have  a  negative 
impact  on  journalistic  freedom.  The  last  consultation  on  the  review  of  the  Irish  defamation 
law took place in late 2016 and did not result in any legislative changes. In 2020, the Council 
of  Europe  platform  to  promote  the  protection  of  journalism  and  safety  of  journalists 
registered one alert concerning Ireland. It was the first alert concerning Ireland since 2015113. 
The alert  concerned a legal  action brought by a political activist who was mentioned in the 
press  report  of  the  Dublin  Inquirer.  The  legal  action  related  to  alleged  negligence  in  the 
journalistic conduct by the newspaper. No alerts have been registered in 2021. Regarding the 
digital  safety  of  journalists,  the  2021  MPM  reiterates  legislative  risks  stemming  from  the 
Data  Retention  Act,  in  particular  its  lack  of  specific  safeguards  for  the  protection  of 
journalistic sources.114 While the Irish government announced in 2020 its intention to revise 
the Communications Act, it is not among current priority files115. 

107 Reporters without Borders – Ireland “Independent News and Media (INM) controlled much of the daily and 
Sunday newspaper market, while broadcasting continued to be dominated by the semi-state company RTE - 
itself facing mounting financial burdens that threaten its continued stability”.. 

108  2021 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Ireland, p. 8. 
109  European  Federation  of  Journalists  (2020),  COVID-19:  What  financial  support  have  the  media  and 

journalists received in Europe?.  

110  The Commission is composed of 10 members, chosen on the basis of their expertise and experience in the 

media.  

111  2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p. 13.  
112  Reporters Without Borders.  
113 The report was not addressed by the Irish authorities. 
114  The  2017  Murray  Report  assessed  the  data  retention  regime  of  the  act  as  insufficiently  safeguarding  the         
principle of protection of journalistic sources. 
115 Autumn legislative programme.  

15 

 
                                                 
IV.  OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

Ireland  has  a  bicameral  parliamentary  system:  Parliament  (Houses  of  the  Oireachtas) 
comprises  a  Lower  House  (Dáil  Éireann),  and  an  Upper  House  (Seanad  Éireann). 
Government  Ministers  and  members  of  Parliament  have  the  right  of  legislative  initiative. 
Constitutional review is carried out by the High Court with a right of appeal to the Court of 
Appeal and the Supreme Court. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC) 
is Ireland’s national human rights and equality institution. 

implemented 

largely  been 

legislative  procedure116,  has 

The  ordinary  legislative  procedure  is  used  to  tackle  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  but 
certain  issues  have  been  raised  regarding  Parliament’s  oversight  of  emergency 
measures. Ireland’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, that has continued to rely on the 
ordinary 
through  Statutory 
Instruments  signed  by  the  Minister  for  Health,  delegated  by  primary  legislation117.  The 
relevant powers in these laws were, according to sunset clauses, foreseen to remain in force 
until  9  November  2020  unless  extended.  A  motion  tabled  in  October  2020  extended  the 
powers  until  9  June  2021,  which  several  members  of  Parliament  objected  to,  suggesting 
shorter  extensions.  The  short  time  allocated  to  debate  on  this  motion  raised  criticism118.  A 
report of the IHREC119 recommended shorter extensions and specifying in the legislation the 
maximum  length  of  any  extension,  while  raising  other  concerns120.  These  concerns  were 
echoed by civil society organisations121. Because of the general election held in January and 
the  delay  in  appointing  a  government,  no  ordinary  committee  meetings  were  held  between 
January and October 2020, while a Special Committee on COVID-19 Response sat between 6 
May 2020 and 30 September 2020. In June 2021, the sunset clauses contained in four pieces 
of  primary  legislation,  brought  in  to  address  COVID-19,  were  further  extended122.  As  a 
result, measures will continue in operation until the 9 November 2021, and can be extended 
further for a single period of three months by a resolution of both Houses. 

The legislative process has been characterised, since the beginning of the pandemic, by 
shortened  discussions  in  Parliament.  The  procedural  tools  to  shorten  parliamentary 
discussion  and  ensure  swift  consideration  by  Parliament  were  used  frequently,  mainly  in 
relation to COVID-19-related legislation. This included waiving the requirement for scrutiny 

116  2020  Rule  of  Law  Report,  country  chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Ireland,  p.  14.  The  ordinary 

legislative procedure envisages statutory oversight available to the Oireachtas.  

117  At the start of the pandemic in March, the  Oireachtas enacted the Health (Preservation and Protection and 
other  Emergency  Measures  in  the  Public  Interest)  Act  2020.  Ancillary  enforcement  measures  were 
authorised in the Criminal Justice (Enforcement Powers) (COVID-19) Act 2020 (September), and the Health 
(Amendment) Act 2020 (October). Also in March, the  Oireachtas enacted the Emergency Measures in the 
Public Interest (Covid-19) Act 2020 which provided broad statutory powers to deal with the harsh economic 
and social effects of the pandemic, as  well as changing the procedures for authorising detention  under the 
Mental Health Act 2001. 

118  Irish  Human  Rights  and  Equality  Commission  (2021)  Ireland’s  Emergency  Powers  During  the  Covid-19 

Pandemic, p. 27. 

119  Ibid.  
120  The  Report  of  the  IHREC  also  criticised  the  limited  scope  for  parliamentary  oversight  of  secondary 
legislation  made  by  the  Minister  for  Health  because  of  the  lack  of  pre-enactment  consultation  with  or 
scrutiny by any committee of the Houses, combined with the limited ex-post scrutiny. Other concerns relate 
to  blurring  the  line  between  legal  requirements  and  health  guidelines,  the  retroactive  application  of 
Regulations and the lack of prompt publication of Regulations. 

121  Contribution from the Irish Council for Civil Liberties for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 12.  
122 Health and Criminal Justice (Covid-19) (Amendment) Act 2021.  

16 

 
                                                 
of the draft text  of a Bill  before it is  published (‘pre-legislative scrutiny’)123, the use of so-
called  ‘guillotine  motions’  to  shorten  the  time  allocated  to  debate,  and  early  signature 
motions  to  ensure  rapid  consideration  by  the  President  of  a  Bill  passed  by  Parliament.  In 
2020, guillotine motions were prepared in 30 out of the 32  Bills that were passed124 and 19 
guillotine  motions  were  used  in  order  to  shorten  the  debate  on  17  different  pieces  of  draft 
legislation. In 2020, early signature motions125 were agreed on 18 occasions, allowing for the 
President’s consideration of the Bill to take place within five days. During the establishment 
phase of new Committees, from September 2020, following the elections to both Houses, it 
was agreed to waive the requirement for pre-legislative scrutiny in relation to 17 of the Bills 
that were  enacted.  In 2020, Committee stage was  undertaken by  a Committee of the whole 
Lower House for 26 of Acts. Concerns were raised by civil society organisations as regards 
the short time allocated for consultations126.  

The accreditation of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission will be reviewed 
in  2021.  It  was  accredited  with  A  status  in  November  2015  by  the  UN  Global  Alliance  of 
National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI)127. In February 2021 the IHREC published a 
report  on  Ireland’s  emergency  powers  during  the  COVID-19  pandemic128.  The  report 
concluded  that  the  principal  measures  introduced  so  far  to  control  the  pandemic  (mainly 
restrictions  on  movement  and  home  gatherings,  obligations  to  wear  face  coverings)  were 
justified by the State’s obligation on to protect public health129. The report also sets a number 
of conclusions, such as recommending that the Irish Government should at all times maintain 
a clear distinction between measures that are legally obligatory and  public health advice, or 
that  all  measures  adopted  as  part  of  the  response  to  the  COVID-19  pandemic  should  be 
subject to sunset clauses.  

Ireland has a vibrant and diverse civil society, although funding restrictions continue to 
raise  some  concerns130.  In  addition  to  the  EUR  45  million  COVID-19  Stability  Fund 
established  by  the  Government  in  2020  to  provide  cash  injection  for  community  and 
voluntary  organisations,  charities  and  social  enterprises  delivering  critical  front-line 

123  Under  Dáil  Standing  Order  173  (1)  the  Business  Committee,  which  is  made  up  of  representatives  of 
Government and all Opposition Parties, can waive the requirement for pre-legislative scrutiny on foot of a 
request from a member of Government. 

124 Out of the 32, 15 Bills were focused on the introduction of various provisions and measures to address the 

Covid-19 pandemic. 

125  ‘Early  Signature  Motion’  -  Article  25  (2)(1)  of  the  Constitution  stipulates  that  when  a  Bill  has  passed  all 
stages  in  both  Houses,  it  is  sent  to  the  Taoiseach,  who  presents  it  to  the  President.  The  President  then 
considers the Bill and the President should sign the Bill ‘not earlier than the fifth day and not later than the 
seventh day after it has been presented to him’. Sub-Section 2 of the same article of the Constitution allows 
that  ‘at  the  request  of  the  Government,  with  the  prior  concurrence  of  Seanad  Éireann,  the  President  may 
sign’ the Bill earlier than the fifth day. This is done by way of a Motion in the Seanad (presented after the 
Seanad has completed its consideration of the Bill), and the Seanad is asked to concur with the Government 
to request the President to sign the Bill earlier than five days. 

126  Contribution from ENNHRI for the 2021 Rule of Law Report, p. 217 and information received in the context 

of the country visit to Ireland. 

127  2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p.15.  
128  Irish  Human  Rights  and  Equality  Commission  (2021),  Ireland’s  Emergency  Powers  During  the  Covid-19 

Pandemic.  

129 The report from the IHREC does not cover the measure introduced in spring 2021 by the Irish Government 
for  a  mandatory  hotel  quarantine  system  for  travelers  arriving  in  Ireland  from  a  number  of  designated 
countries.  The  system  has  been  subject  to  criticism;  see  for  example  ICCL  2021,  ICCL  calls  for  end  to 
mandatory quarantine if rights issues not addressed, 19 April 2021.  

130 2020 Rule of Law Report, country chapter on the rule of law situation in Ireland, p. 15. 

17 

 
                                                 
services131,  an  additional  EUR  10  million  has  been  made  available  for  2021.  Civil  society 
organisations  continued  to  raise  concerns132  about  the  impact  of  the  prohibitions  under  the 
Electoral Act for donations to be given for ‘political purposes’ above a certain amount133 as 
well  as  by  non-citizens  resident  outside  Ireland134.  The  Standards  in  Public  Office 
Commission,  which  is  responsible  for  overseeing  the  implementation  of  the  Act,  has  also 
called for a comprehensive review of the Electoral Act135. A General Scheme of an Electoral 
Reform  was  recently  published  and  aims  to  establish  an  independent,  statutory  Electoral 
Commission. The Government’s intention is that the Electoral Commission will carry out a 
comprehensive  review  of  the  Electoral  Act  1997,  including  addressing  concerns  raised  by 
civil society organisations136.  

131 The Fund focuses on organisations providing supports and services in the following sectors: health and social 
care  (including  addiction,  disability  and  mental  health);  child  and  family  services  (including 
counselling/therapies);  domestic/sexual/gender  based  violence;  housing/homelessness;  community  services 
(e.g.  meals  on  wheels/befriending  services/old  age  supports/vulnerable  people’s  support  groups  etc.);  and 
community education sector. 

132  2020  Rule  of  Law  Report,  country  chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Ireland,  p.  15.  See  also  the 
communication  from  the  UN  Special  Rapporteur  on  the  rights  to  freedom  of  peaceful  assembly  and  of 
association and the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders of 10 December 2020. 
133 Under the Electoral Act 1997, donations may be received by third parties up to a limit of EUR 2500 from a 

donor in any given calendar year.  

134 SIPO has interpreted the relevant legislation as also comprising certain activities carried out by civil society 

organisations, such as advocacy work also outside electoral periods. 

135  SIPO (2020), Annual Report 2019, pp. 27-28. 
136  General Scheme of the Electoral Reform Bill 2020.  

18 

 
                                                 
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2021 Rule of Law report 
can  be  found  at  https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/upholding-rule-
law/rule-law/rule-law-mechanism/2021-rule-law-report-targeted-stakeholder-consultation . 

Bar of Ireland (2021), Submission to the Department of Justice on the General Scheme of the Judicial 
Appointments 
2020 
(https://www.lawlibrary.ie/media/lawlibrary/media/Secure/Submission-to-DOJ-with-Appendix.pdf). 

Commission 

Bill 

Broadcasting  Authority  Ireland  (2019),  Submission  to  the  Department  of  Communications,  Climate 
Action  &  Environment  Public  Consultation  on  the  Regulation  of  Harmful  Content  on  Online 
Platforms  and 
the  Revised  Audiovisual  Media  Service  Directive 
(https://www.bai.ie/en/bai-publishes-submission-on-regulation-of-harmful-online-content-
implementation-of-new-audiovisual-media-services-directive/). 

the  Implementation  of 

Court  of  Justice  of  the  European  Union,  judgment  of  19  November  2019,  A.  K.  and  Others  v  Sąd 
Najwyższy, CP v Sąd Najwyższy and DO v Sąd Najwyższy,  Joined Cases C‑ 585/18, C‑ 624/18 and 
C‑ 625/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:982. 

Council of the Bar of Ireland (2021), Contribution from the Council of the Bar of Ireland for the 2021 
Rule of Law Report. 

Council of the Bar of Ireland (2021), Submission to the Department of Justice on the General Scheme 
of  the  Judicial  Appointments  Commission  Bill  2020  (https://www.lawlibrary.ie/News/reports-and-
submissions.aspx). 

Council  of  Europe:  Committee  of  Ministers  (2010),  Recommendation  CM/Rec(2010)12  of  the 
Committee  of  Ministers  to  member  states  on  judges:  independence,  efficiency  and  responsibilities 
(https://www.coe.int/en/web/cdcj/judicial-independence-and-impartiality). 

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2010),  Report on the Independence of the Judicial System 
Part I: The Independence of Judges adopted by the Venice Commission at its 82nd Plenary Session, 
(CDL-AD(2010)004-e). 

Council  of  Europe:  Venice  Commission  (2020),  Malta,  Opinion  on  proposed  legislative  changes 
(CDL-AD(2020)006). 

Court of Justice of the European Union, judgment of 20 April 2021, Repubblika v Il-Prim Ministru, 
C-896/19, ECLI:EU:C:2021:311. 

Department of Justice (2020a), Draft General Scheme of Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2020 
(http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/General_Scheme_of_the_Judicial_Appointments_Commission
_Bill_2020). 

Department of Justice (2020b), Review Group Report on the Administration of Civil Justice – Report. 
the  High  Court 
Chairperson:  The  Hon.  Mr.  Justice  Peter  Kelly,  Former  President  of 
(http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/Review_of_the_Administration_of_Civil_Justice_-
_Review_Group_Report). 

Department Justice (2020c), Review Group Report on structures and strategies to prevent, investigate 
and penalise economic crime and corruption (https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/be30e-review-group-
report-on-structures-and-strategies-to-prevent-investigate-and-penalise-economic-crime-and-
corruption/). 

Department 
(http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Department_of_Justice_Action_Plan_2021.pdf/Files/Department_of_
Justice_Action_Plan_2021.pdf ). 

(2021a), 

Justice 

Justice 

plan 

of 

2021 

Department 
(https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/d03ff-hamilton-review-group-implementation-plan/). 

(2021b),  Hamilton 

Review  Group 

Justice 

Implementation 

of 

Plan 

19 

 
Department of Public Expenditure and Reform (2020), Second Statutory Review of the Regulation of 
Lobbying  Act 
(https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/7ef279-second-statutory-review-of-the-
regulation-of-lobbying-act-2015/). 

2015 

Department  of  the  Taoiseach  (2020)  Department  of  the  Taoiseach  (2021).  Programme  for 
(https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/7e05d-programme-for-
Government:  Our 
government-our-shared-future/). 

Shared  Future 

Directive  (EU)  2010/13/  on  the  coordination  of  certain  provisions  laid  down  by  law,  regulation  or 
administrative  action  in  Member  States  concerning  the  provision  of  audiovisual  media  services 
(Audiovisual Media Services Directive) in view of changing market realities. 

European Commission (2019), Flash Eurobarometer 482: Businesses' attitudes towards corruption in 
the EU. 

European Commission (2020), Rule of Law report. Country Chapter for Ireland. 

European Commission (2020), Special Eurobarometer 502: Corruption. 

European Commission (2021), EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European  Court  of  Human  Rights,  judgement  of  22  December  2009,  Parlov-Tkalčić  v  Croatia, 
application no. 24810/06. 

GRECO (2020), Fourth Evaluation Round – Evaluation Report on Ireland Corruption prevention in 
respect of members of parliament, judges and prosecutors.(https://rm.coe.int/fourth-evaluation-round-
corruption-prevention-in-respect-of-members-of/1680a06655). 

Irish Council for Civil Liberties (2020), Untenable in a democracy: ICCL renews call for abolition of 
Special  Criminal  Court  (Untenable  in  a  democracy:  ICCL  renews  call  for  abolition  of  Special 
Criminal Court - Irish Council for Civil Liberties). 

Irish Council for Civil Liberties (2021), Contribution from the Irish Council for Civil Liberties for the 
2021 Rule of Law Report.   

Irish Council for Civil Liberties (2021), ICCL calls for end to mandatory quarantine if rights issues 
not addressed, 19 April 2021 (https://www.iccl.ie/news/iccl-calls-for-end-to-mandatory-quarantine-if-
rights-issues-not-addressed/). 

Irish  Court  Service  (2020),  Supporting  Access  to  Justice  in  a  modern,  digital  Ireland.  Long-term 
strategic vision – 2030 (https://iwla.ie/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Long-Term-Strategic-Vision.pdf). 

Irish Government (2021), Input from Ireland for the 2020 Rule of Law Report. 

Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (2021),  Submission to the Minister for Justice on the 
General 
Commission 
(https://www.ihrec.ie/documents/submission-to-the-minister-for-justice-on-the-general-scheme-of-
the-judicial-appointments-commission-bill-2020/). 

Appointments 

Judicial 

Scheme 

the 

of 

Irish  Human  Rights  and  Equality  Commission  (2021),  Ireland’s  Emergency  Powers  During  the 
Covid-19  Pandemic  (https://www.ihrec.ie/documents/irelands-emergency-powers-during-the-covid-
19-pandemic/). 

Judicial 
((https://judicialcouncil.ie/assets/uploads/documents/Personal%20Injuries%20Guidelines.pdf). 

Personal 

Council 

Injuries 

(2021), 

Guidelines 

Law  Society  of  Ireland  (2021),  Submission  to  the  joint  Oireachtas  Committee  on  Justice  on  the 
General 
2020 
Bill 
(https://www.lawsociety.ie/globalassets/documents/submissions/2021-judicial-appointments-
commission-bill.pdf). 

Appointments 

Commission 

Judicial 

Scheme 

of 

Legal  Services  Regulatory  Authority  (2020),  Greater  than  the  Sum  of  Its  Parts?  Consideration  of 
Unification  of  the  Solicitors’  Profession  and  Barristers’  Profession  (https://www.lsra.ie/lsra-
publishes-reports-on-legal-practitioners-education-and-training-and-unification/). 

20 

 
Legal  Services  Regulatory  Authority  (2020),  Setting  Standards:  Legal  Practitioner  Education  and 
Training 
(https://www.lsra.ie/lsra-publishes-reports-on-legal-practitioners-education-and-training-
and-unification/). 

Legal Services Regulatory Authority (2020),  LSRA takes over the regulation of advertising by legal 
practitioners  (LSRA  takes  over  regulation  of  advertising  by  legal  practitioners  –  Legal  Services 
Regulatory Authority). 

Press Council of Ireland (2020),  Annual Report 2019 of The Press Council of Ireland and Office of 
the Press Ombudsman (http://www.presscouncil.ie/about-us/recent-decisions-and-news/annual-report-
2019-of-the-press-council-of-ireland-and-office-of-the-press-ombudsman- ). 

Press Council of Ireland (2021), Submission by Press Council of Ireland and Press Ombudsman to the 
Future 
(https://www.presscouncil.ie/office-of-the-press-ombudsman-
164/publications-and-press-releases/press-releases-1048/submission-by-press-council-of-ireland-and-
press-ombudsman-to-the-future-of-media-commission). 

of  Media  Commission 

Reporters without Borders – Ireland (https://rsf.org/en/ireland). 

Standards in Public Office Commission (2020), Annual Report 2019 (https://www.sipo.ie/reports-and-
publications/annual-reports/). 

Transparency International (2021), Corruption Perceptions Index 2020. 

UN  Human  Rights  Committee  (2014),  Concluding  observations  on  the  fourth  periodic  report  of 
Ireland 
(http://docstore.ohchr.org/SelfServices/FilesHandler.ashx?enc=6QkG1d%2FPPRiCAqhKb7yhsieXFS
udRZs%2FX1ZaMqUUOS9yIqPEMRvxx26PpQFtwrk%2BhtvbJ1frkLE%2BCPVCm6lW%2BYjfrz7
jxiC9GMVvGkvu2UIuUfSqikQb9KMVoAoKkgSG). 

United Nations Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association 
and  the  Special  Rapporteur  on  the  situation  of  human  rights  defenders  (2020),  Mandates  of  the 
Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association and the Special 
Rapporteur  on  the  situation  of  human  rights  defenders  (DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile 
(ohchr.org). 

21 

 
Annex II: Country visit to Ireland 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in March 2021 with: 

Irish Council for Civil Liberties 
Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission 
Irish Small and Medium Enterprises Association (ISME) 

  Bar of Ireland 
  Broadcasting Authority of Ireland 
  Court Service 
  Department of Justice 
  Garda Economic Crime Bureau 
  Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission (GSOC) 
  Hamilton Commission 
  Houses of the Oireachtas Service (Parliament Service) 
 
 
 
  Law Society of Ireland 
  Legal Services Regulatory Authority 
  National Union of Journalists 
  Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement (ODCE) 
  Office of the Director of Public Prosecution 
  Press Council 
  Representatives of the Judiciary 
  Standards in Public Office Commission (SIPO) 
  Transparency International 

* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings: 

  Amnesty International 
  Center for Reproductive Rights 
  CIVICUS 
  Civil Liberties Union for Europe 
  Civil Society Europe 
  Conference of European Churches 
  EuroCommerce 
  European Center for Not-for-Profit Law 
  European Centre for Press and Media Freedom 
  European Civic Forum 
  European Federation of Journalists 
  European Partnership for Democracy  
  European Youth Forum 
  Front Line Defenders 
  Human Rights House Foundation  
  Human Rights Watch  
 
ILGA-Europe 
 
International Commission of Jurists 
 
International Federation for Human Rights 
 
International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network (IPPF EN) 
 
International Press Institute 
  Netherlands Helsinki Committee  
  Open Society European Policy Institute 

22 

 
 
  Philanthropy Advocacy 
  Protection International  
  Reporters without Borders 
  Transparency International EU 

23