A retired former High Court president, Peter Kelly, has declined to comment concerning his appointment as a judge of the Dubai International Financial Centre courts.
When contacted by The Irish Times on Monday following the decision of former chief justice Frank Clarke to submit his resignation as a judge of the courts, Mr Kelly provided a message saying: “I do not wish to comment.”
Mr Clarke said on Saturday he had tendered his resignation to the chief justice of the DIFC courts due to concern the controversy following the appointments might impact on the work of the Law Reform Commission (LRC), of which he was appointed president some months ago.
In a virtual ceremony last Tuesday, Mr Clarke and Mr Kelly were among four retired judges sworn in as judges of the court of appeal of the DIFC courts before Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, vice-president and prime minister of the UAE, ruler of Dubai and president of the DIFC courts.
Donald Trump is changing America in ways that will reverberate long after he is dead
Mark O'Connell: The mystery is not why we Irish have responded to Israel’s barbarism. It’s why others have not
Afghan student nurses crushed as Taliban blocks last hope of jobs
Emer McLysaght: The seven deadly things you should never buy a child at Christmas
The DIFC courts, which began operating in 2006, were set up to serve international institutions operating in Dubai and the UAE. Unlike the rest of Dubai, they do not operate Sharia law but are an independent English language common law judiciary based in the DIFC, with jurisdiction governing civil and commercial disputes nationally and worldwide. It is understood being a judge of the DIFC courts is a part-time role and payment is on an hourly basis.
Mr Clarke retired as chief justice in October, but has since rejoined the Law Library, engaging mainly in mediation work. His presidency of the LRC is a part-time role commanding a €59,000 salary, and he also chairs the Civil Legal Aid Review committee.
He and Mr Kelly, who retired as president of the High Court in June 2020, were obliged to retire after turning 70.
Lawyers and judges here remain divided about the decision of the retired Irish judges to accept appointment to the DIFC courts. Critics have pointed to Dubai’s poor human rights record and some have also expressed concern about perceived commercialisation of the judicial office.
However, supporters said they regarded the appointments as positive for the international perception of the Irish legal system and also noted the two former judges are private citizens.
The critics include Labour Party leader Ivana Bacik, a qualified barrister, who agreed with concerns expressed in an Irish Times opinion article on Friday by Bill Shipsey, a former barrister at the Irish Bar.
Mr Shipsey noted documented violations of fundamental human rights in the UAE and said it “beggars belief” that two well-known and widely respected former judges “would lend their reputations to the UAE and al-Maktoum by becoming judges of the DIFC courts”.
Ms Bacik said her main concern was about Mr Clarke holding the position of a judge in the DIFC courts, courts she regarded as “a mechanism to support an oppressive regime” while also being president of the LRC, a State body. “There is a deliberate strategy by that regime to use respected former judges as a way to legitimise it,” she said.
