The Chief Justice, Mr Justice Ronan Keane, yesterday agreed that a body to deal with judicial misconduct was needed. The loss of two judges "in such distressing circumstances" following the Philip Sheedy affair made this clear.
Admitting that present structures were inadequate, Mr Keane made it clear that if there was to be a new disciplinary body, it would have to be controlled by the judges themselves.
"There is a very strong wish in the judiciary that, just as the professions regulate themselves, the judiciary should be responsible for themselves," he said.
In his first interview since his appointment earlier this year, and making it clear he was speaking on behalf of the judges, Mr Justice Keane attempted once and for all to put the Philip Sheedy controversy to bed. Mr Justice Keane took over office from Mr Justice Liam Hamilton, who conducted the inquiry into the Sheedy affair.
In what was interpreted as indirect criticism of the former Supreme Court judge, Mr Hugh O'Flaherty, for his actions in the Sheedy case, Mr Justice Keane said "any sensible judge" would tell a person who asked for advice to "see your solicitor".
"We have all been used to the fact that we are asked in a casual way by people about the law since they know we are lawyers. Obviously, members of your family, your friends and so on will tell you about an experience they have had, but one never gives advice in any real sense," he said.
"In fact, the only possible advice you can ever give them is: `Why don't you see your solicitor?"'
Mr Justice Keane rejected any suggestion that the Court of Criminal Appeal, in which Philip Sheedy had his sentence reduced, operated on an informal basis.
"No court should be run on an informal basis. There must be procedures. There must be a certain dignity," he said.
"The Court of Criminal Appeal is dealing with extremely serious matters. It deals with serious crime, appeals against convictions and sentences - and, in my experience going back over 20 years on that court, it is run with a strict regard to the legal principles."
Mr Justice Keane said his position meant he had to remain aloof from conversation. If he was at a social function and a discussion started on a case that might come before him, "you shut them off, sometimes rather abruptly".
In relation to the appointment of judges, Mr Justice Keane said that, by and large, everyone knew that appointments have been made on a political basis and on the basis that this person is seen as a supporter of a political party.
He said the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, of which he was chairman, recommends up to seven names to the Minister for Justice for a judicial post.
"They are appointed by the President on the nomination of the Government. It is the Government that has the say. If you were to go further with a different mechanism that did not involve the Government at all, that would certainly require a constitutional amendment, in my view."
He said that while the loss of two judges had given rise to concern among members of the judiciary, the Sheedy affair had not damaged the reputation of the judiciary.
"That is because people's view of the judiciary is not shaped by an unusual event such as the Sheedy case, but is about what actually happens in the courts up and down the country every day," he said.
He said he did not agree with individual judges giving interviews and going on a "solo run". He said this would be "dangerous and undesirable".