 —  April – May 2013
F
EW forelocks these days are tugged when
top politicians, professionals or church-
men pass by. The recurring theme of the
age is one of loss of respect for the lofty.
Yet, for a number of reasons, the judgments
issued by our higher courts apparently continue
to command popular respect.
True, many consider our judges to be overpaid
and part of a remote elite, presiding over a flawed
justice system, yet there is a pretty general accept-
ance that the individuals occupying high judicial
positions are people of substance.
Scant popular sympathy is on hand for those
who display contempt towards the courts.
In part, this may stem from a recognition that
our judges have played a major role in papering
over the cracks left by a dithering legislature
unwilling to implement reforms that could cost
them in the ballot box. Irish judges are viewed as
incorruptible, notwithstanding an unfortunate
recent case, that of former Judge Perrin.
Their work rate is viewed as being high.
Above the District Court level, judges have, by
and large, avoided the temptation of wading into
controversy.
More recently, the senior courts have been
forced to cope with the fallout from the wave of
insolvencies.
Judges have however, sought to iron out the
flaws in the current system, often using creative
means.
Overseas, the US Supreme court has, in the
past, served as a beacon.
In the s, Earl Warren presided over
a Supreme Court that helped to transform
American life.
In , in ‘Brown v US Board of Education’,
the Court outlawed segregation in the school sys-
tem and it later sanctioned an overhaul of the
country’s State legislatures in a move designed
to stamp out political gerrymandering.
The Irish Supreme Court, at times, has been
highly creative.
For strong believers in the right to individ-
ual freedom, the dissenting judgment of the late
Mr Justice Niall McCarthy in ‘Norris v Attorney
General’ stands out.
McCarthy in favouring the application to have
laws banning homosexual acts declared unconsti-
tutional, questioned how bans contained in Acts
dating back to  and  could be deemed
to be consistent with constitutional guarantees
of freedom of expression.
He cited the US Supreme Court judge, Louis
Brandeis, to the effect that “the right to privacy
is the right to be left alone”.
McCarthy had a long, distinguished career as
a barrister and was unusual in that he stepped
straight from private practice onto the Supreme
Court. He was popular and witty.
Adrian Hardiman also moved straight from
practice at the Bar onto the highest court in the
land.
As a counsel, he stood out by dint of his elo-
quence and the sheer size and breadth of his legal
practice. A brilliant advocate, colleagues recall
The Supreme Court’s
scourge of the state,
tribunals and political
correctness.
Edmund Burke and Antonin Scalia meet
Friedrich Hayek
Adrian
Hardiman
kyran fitzgerald
Politically promiscuous, he
was a strong backer of the
Progressive Democrats,
having previously been both
a member of Fine Gael and,
later, a Fianna Fáil candidate
H
A
R
D
I
M
A
N
A
D
R
I
A
N
PROFILE