MOJ Press Release

Chuck calls for victim-centred criminal
justice system

Minister of Justice, the Honourable Delroy Chuck, speaking at the 10^th Annual General Meeting of the Manchester Victim Support Unit Parish Advisory Committee held at the Las Palmas Conference Centre in Mandeville on Thursday (Nov. 17, 2011).

November 19, 2011- The Minister of Justice, the Hon. Delroy Chuck, wants the Jamaican justice system to be more victim-centred rather than offender-centred especially with regard to sentencing.

“…Our criminal justice system, regrettably, is not victim-centred. It is offender-centred, (it) looks at how we deal with or treat the offender. The victim is often seen as nothing more than a witness who should come to court and that’s it. Is that really fair to a victim of crime?”

According to Minister Chuck, it is time to consider having sentences determined in a more open way in which the victim gets an opportunity to express his or her view on what type of sentence should be imposed on his or her offender.

The Justice Minister was addressing the 10^th Annual General Meeting of the Manchester Victim Support Unit Parish Advisory Committee held at the Las Palmas Conference Centre in Mandeville on Thursday (Nov. 17, 2011). He was speaking against the background of the public outcry surrounding the sentence handed down in the Garsha Wilson case, the accused was given a sentence of 12 years imprisonment for abducting, raping and burying alive a 12 year old girl. Wilson was convicted of abduction, rape and attempted murder.

Mr. Chuck further suggested that there is an immediate need to look at sentencing guidelines, which would assist the judges in their sentencing. “We also now need to look at having a sentencing hearing where both sides can give their views as to what should be the appropriate sentence without taking it away from the judge; he will be the final arbiter. It seems to me that the judge should be assisted and should hear the emotional plea, the petitions of both sides.

“I don’t believe that it is fair to the victims of crimes that even though they assist in getting a guilty verdict that they should walk away and hear that the man/woman got a suspended sentence or only got a fine. That victim may feel very hurt that a proper sentence has not been imposed,” he said.

The Justice Minister explained that this happens in other countries, where the conviction having been obtained, there is a hearing, and the victim, their family and friends and also those of the offenders, give reasons why the sentence should be tempered with mercy and the victim and his or her family can also say why the sentence should be tempered with revenge.

“At the end of the day, the hands of the judge are not tied, but at least the judge, in imposing sentence, gets the opportunity to see both sides of the coin, why the sentence should be harsh or why it should be merciful. And in between those two sides of the coin he can decide on a sentence which fits the views and the opinions of both sides,” he said.

Mr Chuck also pointed out that some victims may even forgive their offender and would prefer if a harsh punishment is not imposed.

“There are many victims who would have forgiven their offender … That happens many times…it would be useful sometimes to hear how the victim feels in terms of what would be an appropriate sentence.”

Though this is not a policy of the Government at this time, Mr Chuck said he believed it was something that needed to be seriously considered. “It is something at this time that I’m extending and hope that I can get some discussion going in our society, within the courts, among judges and among citizens.”

Courtesy Call!

Ministry of Justice Photo Release

The new United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Resident Coordinator and Resident Representative of the UNDP in Jamaica, Dr. Arun Kashyap made a courtesty call on the Minister of Justice, the Hon. Delroy Chuck on Tuesday, November 8, 2011 at the Ministry's head office on Oxford Road.

Clearing the divorce backlog

Press Release

November 2, 2011 - The Ministry of Justice wishes to report that an average of 200 divorces are filed monthly which has created a backlog in the court system. At the present time Puisine Judges have to grant the decree nisi and decree absolute.

To reduce the backlog, the Ministry of Justice, will be submitted to the Cabinet and subsequently the House of Parliament, a proposal to amend the law to allow for the Master in Chambers to grant the decree nisi and allow the decree absolute to be granted by the Puisine Judge.

Releasing the capital in deceased persons’ Estates

Press Release

November 2, 2011 - Since 1980 in excess of 9000 applications for Probate and Letters of Administration of deceased estates have been filed and over 3000 since 2007. Due to the high fees for stamping of these Probates and Letters of Administration and subsequent Estate Duties which amounted to up to 15% of the estate value, these files remained dormant in the Supreme Court.

In response to this, in his budget presentation of April 2011, the Minister of Finance the Hon. Audley Shaw, reduced the stamp duties to a flat fee of $5,000 for applications that were previously filed and for new applications (between $5,000.00 - $25,000.00 depending on the value of the Estate). In addition Estate Duties (Death Duties) were reduced to 1.5%.         

In anticipation of the completion of those previously filed and new applications, the Ministry of Justice has put in place arrangements to expedite the disposal of these cases.

During the month of October in excess of 600 files were assessed by the Supreme Court Registry and now await correction or collection by Attorneys for the applicants. With the cooperation of the applicants and their attorneys, the Ministry of Justice hopes that the majority of these 9000 files and the new application can be completed over the next four to six months (4-6) during which time this special arrangement is in place.

Statement to Parliament on Ganja - November 1, 2011

STATEMENT TO PARLIAMENT ON THE TRANSFER OF GANJA-RELATED CASES FROM THE JURISDICTION OF THE RESIDENT MAGISTRATES’ COURTS TO THE COURTS OF SUMMARY JURISDICTION (PETTY SESSIONS COURTS)

MADAM SPEAKER,

MEMBERS OF THIS HONOURABLE HOUSE

Members may recall that when I assumed office as Minister of Justice in July 2011, I stressed that one of my goals for the duration of my tenure as Minister, was to significantly reduce the backlog of cases in the Justice System. As one who has practised for years in the several Courts in Jamaica, I know only too well that there is a severe backlog of cases at all levels of the Court system; particularly in the Resident Magistrates’ Courts and the Supreme Court.   In the Justice Ministry we have done a thorough analysis of this perennial problem and have identified some ways in which we can tackle the problem with a view to significantly reducing the present chronic state of backlog.

One of the ways, I submit, Madam Speaker,  in which a case backlog reduction strategy can yield positive results  is to place those cases involving minor offences within the jurisdiction of the Petty Sessions Courts by moving them out of the jurisdiction of the Resident Magistrates’ Courts. In this regard, we have looked at the overwhelming volume of ganja related cases currently before the Resident Magistrates’ (RM) Courts and the urgent need to free up the judicial officers and Court staff so that they can address the more serious and complex matters in their caseload, with a view to reducing the backlog.

Based on our analysis of the data presented, a Submission was made to Cabinet, seeking approval to transfer certain ganja-related cases from the Resident Magistrates’ Courts to the Petty Sessions Courts. Cabinet has given its approval in principle of the proposal, and for a Statement on the subject to be made to this Honourable House by the Minister responsible.

Let me hasten, Madam Speaker, to make it abundantly clear to all the Members of this Honorable House and to the people of Jamaica whom we represent, as well as to those others with a vested interest in the social-economic well-being of this Country, that this proposal is not a signal (either expressed or implied) that the Government of Jamaica is advocating the decriminalisation of the use of ganja as was recommended by the National Commission on Ganja in 2001. My Government intends to continue and to hold steadfast to the hard line it has taken against the use of illegal substances and the attendant nefarious and criminal  activities associated with it such as drug trafficking.

Indeed, Madam Speaker, we are moving ahead with our proposal to increase the penalties  for the more serious drug-related offences in that regard we are conducting, with the assistance of the Commissioner of Police, research to do a comparative analysis of what obtains in other jurisdictions as far as it relates to penalties for serious drug offences. As soon as that research is completed, I will be making the appropriate submissions to Cabinet with a view to having the necessary amendments made to the relevant laws.

 The proposal contained in the Statement that I am about to make before this Honourable House today, with respect to the transfer of certain ganja-related cases to the lower Courts, is a strategic measure aimed entirely at alleviating the existing burden on the caseload in the RM Courts so that ultimately, it contributes to the reduction of the backlog of unresolved criminal cases which currently stands in excess of 414,000.

Madam Speaker, we are all well aware that Ganja is widely used in Jamaica for recreational and religious purposes as well as folk medicine.  Although the drug remains illegal in Jamaica, between 20% to 40% of Jamaicans are users of this substance, among them, members of the Rastafarian faith who use it as part of their religious sacraments.

The Dangerous Drug Act prohibits the possession and smoking of ganja.  and prescribes that every person who has in his possession any ganja shall be guilty of an offence and if convicted before a Circuit Court, shall be sentenced to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to both a fine and imprisonment. Alternatively, upon summary conviction before a Resident Magistrate, the offender is liable to a fine not exceeding $100 for each ounce of ganja, provided that the fine does not exceed  $15,000, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years; or both such fine and imprisonment.

Madam Speaker, the Drug Court (Treatment and Rehabilitation of Offenders) Act prescribes a health-related rather than punitive approach to drug use. It provides for the establishment of a Drug Court aimed at facilitating the treatment and rehabilitation of drug offenders. This Court is presided over by a Resident Magistrate sitting with two Justices of the Peace who have jurisdiction with respect to any offence triable in a Resident Magistrate’s Court. Every participant in the Drug Court Programme is required to give written consent to his or her participation as an alternative to the imposition of a  custodial sentence .Where consent is given and the participant successfully completes the Programme, he or she may be discharged either with or without conditions . Additionally, a conviction in respect of the relevant offence does not form part of the criminal record of the offender who successfully completes the prescribed treatment programme.

With respect to ganja, the Drug Court will hear cases involving smoking or otherwise using the substance, possession of utensils in connection with smoking, and possession of up to eight ounces of the drug. The establishment of this Court in Jamaica has set a precedent for the establishment of similar diversionary mechanisms to treat with persons who by their own admission are users of ganja.

The proposal to remove those cases involving the possession of a small quantity of ganja from the jurisdiction of the RM Court to that of the Petty Sessions Courts recognises that the current provisions of the Dangerous Drugs Act do not provide for rehabilitation as an option for persons convicted of possession of small quantities of ganja, but instead prescribe the same penalty as for other offenders who are convicted of possession of larger amounts of the drug.

 Persons convicted of ganja possession of whatever quantity, also incur a criminal record, the expungement of which is available only if the offence attracted a non-custodial sentence or a sentence of imprisonment not exceeding 3 years and the offender does not commit another offence during the period of rehabilitation as provided in the Criminal Records (Rehabilitation of Offenders) Act.

Madam Speaker, the ongoing clampdown by the Security Forces on the use, trade  and  export of ganja and  the high volume of  cases that have to be  heard in the Resident Magistrates’ Courts as a consequence, has resulted in   clogging up the system, overloading the work of the judicial officers and other  Court staff who must process these cases, and most importantly, contributing to a marked inefficiency and protracted delays in the disposal of other cases involving far more serious offences. 

A recent study found that the majority of the more than 6,000 cases involving the offence of possession of illegal substances that were disposed of in 2009 in the Resident Magistrates’ Courts were for the possession of ganja in quantities of less than one ounce (28 grams).   As of the end of July 2011, more than 1,100 of the 8,700 persons appearing before the Resident Magistrates’ Courts were on charges of possession of ganja in quantities similar to those revealed in the study.

The Security Forces, Madam Speaker, have also been hard pressed to bring all ganja related cases to the RM Courts given the pervasiveness of the indiscriminate use of this substance across the island.   It would undoubtedly be more cost effective to bring offenders who are charged with possession of small quantities of ganja to the Petty Sessions Court as the processes there  are relatively simple and do not occupy the same level of time and resources required for prosecution  in the RM Courts.  

Even as the Security Forces exercise care in pursuing persons who breach the Dangerous Drugs Act and other anti-narcotics legislation, the potential does exist for police excesses in the arrest and detention of persons on charges of possession of small quantities of ganja. With the proposed transfer of these cases to the Petty Sessions Courts, we expect to see a shortened process that will allow for a swifter disposal of such cases in those instances where the accused persons plead Guilty.  Of course, if an accused pleads Not Guilty, then his/her case will be sent to the RM Court for hearing and disposal.

Madam Speaker, there has been some  debate as to what is meant by “small quantities” of ganja  and I wish to say that we are  referring to quantities not exceeding 8 ounces or the metric equivalent.   This definition is justifiable as this quantity relates mostly to persons who are found in possession of the drug for personal use rather than for trade.  Furthermore, 8 ounces is the maximum amount prescribed in the Drug Curt (Treatment and Rehabilitation of Offenders) Act for admission to the Drug Court Programme and we need to maintain consistency. Experience has also demonstrated that most of the cases relating to ganja which are brought before the Resident Magistrates’ Courts involve offenders who have been arrested while in possession of or smoking a “spliff” – a cigarette made with ganja.  

Persons charged with possession of ganja with the intent to deal, traffic, and trade and export , as well as possession of the drug in quantities exceeding 8 ounces, will continue to be tried in the Resident Magistrates’ Courts as prescribed under the Dangerous Drugs Act. Persons who flagrantly and indiscriminately smoke or otherwise use ganja in public spaces will also be prosecuted in the Resident Magistrates’ Courts, and the failure of an accused to abide by the ruling of the Petty Sessions Court, in paying the fine imposed, will also result in the case being placed before a Resident Magistrate’s Court.

What are the implications for this transfer of the minor ganja- related offences to the Petty Sessions Courts?

Madam Speaker, the proposal being advocated is for the differentiation of treatment between those persons charged with possession of quantities of ganja below a prescribed amount (in this case 8 ounces or less) from those persons charged with possession of larger quantities.  This will result in a reduction in the number of ganja related cases heard each year in the Resident Magistrates’ Courts as only those cases involving quantities in excess of the prescribed amount will remain under the jurisdiction of these Courts with the effect that the overall caseload in the RM Court will diminish to allow the Judges to focus and engage more judicial time on the more complex and serious cases.

Additionally, Madam Speaker, the Ministry is currently reviewing the jurisdiction of the Courts of Petty Sessions with a view to expansion, and so this move will serve the dual purpose of reducing the volume of cases heard in the RM Courts and at the same time increasing access to justice by the ordinary citizen.  Consultations with key stakeholders have so far yielded positive support for this initiative.

The possession of small quantities of ganja can be regarded as a summary matter for which the offender often pleads guilty as the evidence against him is incontrovertible.  The amendment of the Justices of the Peace Jurisdiction Act would however be required to make provision for the offence to be triable in the Petty Sessions Courts.  Speedier disposal of such cases will also be achieved, with the concurrent benefit of reducing the backlog, since such matters are usually disposed of within three months of filing in the RM Courts and there is the real potential for an even faster adjudication within the Petty Sessions Courts.

One may ask, Madam Speaker, how does the Ministry of Justice intend to strengthen the capacity of the Petty Sessions Courts to handle the volume of these cases when the transfer takes effect?

The short answer, Madam Speaker, is that the institutional capacity of the Petty Sessions Courts will be strengthened through the appointment of an increased number of Justices of the Peace to serve in these Courts, as well as for the implementation of more intensive training for them.  The current estimate is that there are 1,500 Justices of the Peace who serve in the Petty Sessions Courts islandwide. To support an increase in that number of Justices of the Peace serving the Courts, more Clerks of Courts will also be required. Intensive training in the provisions of the relevant Acts, such as the Dangerous Drugs Act, will become necessary and in this regard, the Justice Training Institute (JTI) ,the training agency of the Ministry will be asked to develop the necessary curricula to provide specialized training for JPs in this and related areas.

As far as it relates to the capacity of the physical infrastructure, the transfer of these cases to the Petty Sessions Courts will call for us to maximize the use of existing outstations as Courts.  In addition, alternative venues may be brought into the mix of locations at which such cases may be heard.  To respond to the increase in the caseload of the Petty Sessions Courts, the frequency of sittings of these Courts, which currently averages four times per month, may also have to be increased.

 Members of this House should be made aware, Madam Speaker, that the proposal to remove cases relating to small quantities of ganja from the RM Courts to the Petty Sessions Courts does not contravene or offend any existing International Convention or Protocol on Narcotic or Psychotropic  Substances to which Jamaica is a State Party.

 Madam Speaker, Jamaica remains committed to these as well as any future International Conventions and Protocols in its fight against trafficking in narcotics and substance abuse. This proposal does not represent a “softening” of this Government’s position on ganja but rather a calculated attempt at increasing efficiencies in the prosecution and treatment of drug abuse offenders.

In addition to the Justice of the Peace Jurisdiction Act, amendment of the Dangerous Drugs Act and the Drug Court (Treatment and Rehabilitation of Offenders) Act will be necessary to give effect to the proposal.

Understandably, the proposal will have cost implications as they relate to the employment of additional Clerks of Courts to work in the Petty Sessions Courts, as well as the costs of preparing and equipping more spaces for court sittings.  The necessary follow-up treatment programme provided under the Drug Court Programme (which is also under review) will also involve increased costs to accommodate a higher number of clients who will be referred to the Drug Court from the Petty Sessions Courts. 

Madam Speaker, notwithstanding this, I believe we can say, with some conviction, that Savings will accrue in the reduction of the costs associated with the prosecution of persons charged with small quantities of ganja, particularly in terms of the costs of judicial time and case preparation.

Finally, Madam Speaker, I want to assure the Members of this Honorable House that the proposal for transfer of these cases will be taken to the key stakeholders for their feedback before the final position is decided.  The key objective of these consultations will be to arrive at consensus on the proposal and to determine the various amendments to the relevant statutes that will be required to bring it into effect.  The Ministry of Finance and the Public Service will also be consulted and its comments taken into account with regard to the proposal and the costs implications.

THANK YOU, Madam Speaker.

TVJ News - Bite of the Week - October 21, 2011

Minister of Justice Delroy Chuck insists on the police follow the law and preserve the rights and freedoms of  Jamaicans!

To view video, click on the link below:

http://www.televisionjamaica.com/Programmes/PrimeTimeNews.aspx/Videos/13202 

Case overload!

Article of Interest

Published in The Daily Gleaner - MINISTER OF Justice Delroy Chuck said the Government is moving to implement new legislation to help stem the current backlog in the courts.

"Right now, we are looking at introducing new arbitration legislation on the legislative agenda of the Government," Chuck said last Saturday, during the graduation ceremony for students of Norman Manley Law School, University of the West Indies, Mona, St Andrew.

Chuck also told the gathering that the new legislation would make way for the establishment of a more modern system of arbitration.

Currently, some civil cases are referred to the Dispute Resolution Foundation for mediation.
"We want to see Jamaica and the Caribbean becoming a hub for local, regional and international arbitration, which commercial entities and traders across the world can utilise in settling their commercial and trade disputes," Chuck said.

Citing that last year there were almost 460,000 cases before the courts, with over half being in a state of backlog, the minister said the Government recognised that it has a large responsibility. He said, however, stemming the backlog in the courts system is everybody's business, as the issue poses real threats to the country's economy.

"From an economic and investment point of view, the backlog in our courts chases away investment," he said.

"There are hundreds of thousands of cases that are in the court system for eight months or longer, many for years. We are in need of lawyers to resolve, honestly, the multiplicity of disputes. I urge all of you, regardless of where you practise, to look for ways in which you can assist your clients to settle matters outside of the courtroom, wherever this is possible," he urged the graduates.

Meanwhile, Chuck has opened the discussion to look at lengthening the number of hours spent in courts by litigants, adding that at present the courts are utilised at an average of less than five hours daily.
"Is it possible for us to have a system where we have two shifts operating in the court - one in the morning and one in the afternoon?" he asked.

"I see with this a situation where we can have two or more panels of Court of Appeal judges sitting each day maximising the rate of disposal," Chuck said.

The Graduation Exercise for the Class of 2011 - Norman Manley Law School

Speech delivered by Minister of Justice the Hon. Delroy Chuck


Mr. Chairman, Your Lordships, Distinguished Guests, Colleagues, Ladies and Gentlemen, Graduands of the Norman Manley Law School, 2011.

It is with pleasure and honour that I have accepted the invitation to address this graduating class.   

To you bright young men and women, I join in your celebration of the past two years – and for some, more than two years. I know from my own experience that the path to becoming a lawyer and entering the legal profession is a long one. You have spent innumerable hours preparing, studying and working, fretting, even wasting time and dreaming of this day. After more years than you might wish to count your real journey now begins !

I hope that you will allow me to speak to you today as one would speak to his friends:  words of reality and advice, words of admonition and words of encouragement- just a few words- this evening is not a time for lectures. This evening is a time for commemorating not only the legacy that has brought you to this moment but a time to relish first, in the beginning of your own individual legacies as bearers of the standard of justice and as defenders of the rule of law; and also your collective contribution as the newest generation of legal professionals.

As I pondered what to share with you today, I have prayed for guidance and so I hope that my message will enlarge your visions and will motivate you as you enter this noble profession. Welcome!

The Legal Education Certificate gives you the opportunity to become attorneys-at-law and the vast majority of you will begin to work in a law firm, a private corporation or for the Government.  Diligence, hard work, and a great deal of more hours of preparation will help you to succeed. 

But I want you to know that the hallmark of your success will lie in the character and reputation that you build for yourself.  

The legacy that you create must be defined by honesty and integrity. 

These two words, "honesty” and “integrity” are closely associated and often used interchangeably but are not synonymous.

Integrity is the quality or condition of being whole, complete, unbroken, and   undivided. The word integrity comes from the Latin root word "integer" and is related to other words with the same root such as entire and integrate. All of these expressions share the notion of being intact, sound, uncorrupted, and perfect. 

Personal integrity implies such trustworthiness and incorruptibility that one is incapable of being false to a trust or covenant.

Honesty is the quality or condition of being truthful, sincere, candid, and worthy of honor. The word honesty comes from the Latin root word "honestus" and is related to other words with the same root such as honor and honorable. Each of these expressions shares the notion of  being genuine, trustworthy, upright,  respectable, and decent.

Honesty is more than not lying. It is truth telling, truth speaking, truth living, and truth loving. 

Never disrobe yourselves of the mantle of integrity and honesty.  

It is my hope that you will seek out such law firms and companies that are known for their uprightness and that have a reputation of honesty. This will make it much easier for you to be a good lawyer and to fast track your chosen vocation.  Maintain the good name of the profession. There are far too many lawyers who do not maintain the good name of this profession.  

I heard once of a lawyer named Impos Syble who was shopping for a tombstone. After he had made his selection, the stonecutter asked him what inscription he would like on it.

"Here lies an honest man and a lawyer," responded the lawyer. The Stone Cutter replied "Sorry, but I can't do that, it is against the law to bury two people in the same grave. However, I could put `here lies an honest lawyer'."
The Lawyer protested "But that won't let people know who it is!”

"Sure it will," retorted the stonecutter. "People will read it and exclaim, "That's impossible!"

It’s a funny joke. But what is not funny is that many people do not see this as a joke- it is almost accepted as normal today for lawyers to be seen as dishonest, brutal sharks who only care about winning cases and having a perfect litigation score. 

In your quest to become a good lawyer, do not look so much on the number of cases that you have won.  Look at how well you have served the interest of your client.  Seek to build a relationship of trust so that these clients can return to you and can recommend you to prospective clients.  Your clients will be your greatest source of advertisement. When persons are shopping for lawyers, it’s not the telephone directory or internet ads that they often use, it is the recommendation of their friends. 

 What will set you apart from an ocean of lawyers is what your last client has to say about you. So treat your clients well, understand that even though this for you is a job and a calling, for them it is oftentimes their life.  How you handle their matters can be the difference between life and death or between prosperity and bankruptcy.  Matters which  to you may seem routine or simple procedures, are not seen as routine and simple by your clients.  Treat every client with the same level of respect and earnest care, and treat each case as if it were the most important matter you have ever done in your career. 

I say serve the interest of your clients. But above that, and above all else, serve the interest of justice!  I suppose the easiest solution is to choose good clients and good cases, but that’s not always possible.  There are many clients who set out to mislead you or misguide you. There are many persons who have matters before the Courts because they cannot or have failed on their own to be just and honest with their fellow citizens and would seek to persuade you to act in furtherance of their malicious, dishonest and selfish intentions.  To that I ask you to remember that the interest of justice must be paramount and while you are called to a position of service, you are not being called to a position of servitude, and so you must serve your clients without being their servants.  

Be respectful of other lawyers who are your colleagues in the pursuit of justice.  Respect those who have served the profession with dedication and sacrifice. There is a reason it is called practising law. Even with many years of training and more to come, you do not and will not know everything.  Seek knowledge and wisdom from your peers and seniors.  Treat other lawyers as you wish to be treated. When you enter into negotiation or enter the court room, understand that your colleague is there for the same purpose as you – to serve the best interest of his or her client. Even when the stakes are high, do not always take on the adversarial nature of a court case.  

There is a saying that goes “A good lawyer knows the law but a great lawyer knows the judge.”  Mr. Chairman I humbly submit that we are known to have a fine cadre of judges but graduands, I wish not to be unrealistic.  You are entering a justice system that is not perfect. There has been dishonesty in all areas of the justice system.  It is for this reason that one of the priorities of my Ministry under our Justice Reform Programme is to build trust and confidence in the justice system.  You are entering a system that is being threatened by corruption.

There is corruption within the court and the justice system, where the police have been paid to say they cannot find a witness, or persons have been paid to have documents destroyed- amongst many other things.  Cases languish on the books for years with very little progress, clients become frustrated and cannot move on with their lives, sometimes they appease their grievances by taking justice into their own hands, the lawyers get a bad reputation as being of no help, the justice system gets a bad reputation of being of no use.  What I’m asking you, what I’m exhorting you, do not be tempted to contribute to the problems of the justice system.  I’m asking you to not allow yourselves to succumb to corruption. The level of corruption that we face in the justice system is formidable, but there is a solution to this scourge: Maintain your integrity and your honesty!

If we cannot remove corruption from our justice system, it is unlikely that we can remove it elsewhere. Our judges are known for their integrity and fair play but so much more is required of them. They must assist in removing any taint of corruption, vulgarity or malpractice that may exist and they must help us to  strengthen public trust and confidence in the justice system.

To be sure, the justice system is in crisis and in need of repair and improvement. We have first class lawyers, and judges- why can’t we have a first class justice system. The Government understands that it has a role to play in all of this, but everyone needs to play an even greater role to improve the quality of justice. I have in my office a massive plan for the reform and modernization of the justice system. Within our resources and through the help of many development partners we are taking the items point by point and looking at ways to get them implemented.

I want you to consider what role you can play in this Justice Reform.  What I hope for is better governance in the justice system. Not for the Executive to be looked upon as the miracle worker that can simply provide all the necessary resources, or to dole out diagnoses and directives for the solutions.  But for us to be able to openly discuss how we have drifted to this low level and more importantly how we can move forward. 

There was a story about four friends that all we know. Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody.

 There was an important job to be done and Everybody was sure it would be done by Somebody.

 Anybody could have done it. But Nobody did.

Somebody got angry about that because it was Everybody’s job.

Everybody thought that Anybody could do it, but Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn’t do it.

It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could have done.

It is so easy for anybody to blame somebody. It is time for everybody to take responsibility and act promptly to reform and secure a proper system of justice.

We have in the justice system a massive backlog of cases.  There are hundreds of thousands of cases that are in the court system for eight (8) months or longer- many for years.  Last year there were almost 460,000 cases before the Courts, with over half being in a state of backlog and this has been the case for at least the last decade. For every six persons in Jamaica, there is a case in the Courts. Now, that tells us many things.   

First- there is a problem- a problem to which everybody says it’s nobody’s fault but the situation persists.  Second- there is a lot of work to be done by lawyers.  I am aware that one of the greatest challenges you will face will be in finding a job- the competition is very stiff and the job market is very difficult at this time.  But, quite incredibly, we have a situation where we have lots of lawyers without work and lots of work available for lawyers. When shall the two meet? 

I put it to you that we should start with what we do have.  We are in need of lawyers to resolve HONESTLY, the multiplicity of disputes. As an Administration we are looking at a number of ways that we can first of all steer appropriate cases away from the formal court system.  One of the ways that we have been doing this is by supporting the work of Mediation in Jamaica. The Dispute Resolution Foundation is actively engaged in Mediation, and civil matters from the Supreme Court are referred for mediation. I urge you to get involved in mediation and with the work of the DRF, particularly, those of you who may not find employment immediately.  It will help you to build up your experience and to make important networks.

 I urge all of you, regardless of where you practice, to look for ways in which you can assist your clients to settle matters outside of the courtroom, wherever this is possible. Often times we push for a win- lose situation, when we can, with guidance, secure for both parties and yourself, a win- win situation- and everyone moves on with their lives- clients have secured justice economically and you are free to take on more clients without being weighed down by cases languishing for years on end.

Right now, we are looking at introducing new arbitration legislation on the legislative agenda of the Government, thereby allowing a modern formal system of arbitration to be established in Jamaica. We want to see Jamaica and the Caribbean becoming a hub for local, regional and international arbitration which commercial entities and traders across the world can utilize in settling their commercial and trade disputes. We need to resolve our own disputes also, both through the DRF and other such entities and through Arbitration.

I do believe that  this is an avenue that will provide many opportunities for young lawyers who are interested in practising commercial and business law, particularly where the use of Information and Communication Technology and other creative and scientific processes are concerned.  

There are more laws that we hope will be passed which will open up opportunities for you and for the country. Earlier this year, The Jamaica International Financial Services Authority Act, 2011 was passed, thus starting the process of Jamaica being able to capitalize in that market. The Government is working also on updating the laws that will protect the creative and scientific property of Jamaican people and this initiative will create many opportunities for you. 

Even as we seek to steer away as many cases from trial as we can, we need to consider potential solutions to the problems that exist within the court system.  From an economic and investment point of view, the backlog in our courts chases away investment. From a social point of view, it chases away justice.  I know the courts of Jamaica, both as a fellow lawyer and as the Minister. I recently started a tour of the Courts. I know that some of them are in need of repair and also in need of equipment. But I invite you the young lawyers to enter the discussion on how we can make better use of the significant resources that have been invested in these Courts and are available to us. 

In spite of the fact that some of our courts need improvement, are we utilizing them in the best and most effective and efficient way? Are we getting the best value for the money invested in the Justice System?  Under our reform programme we are trying to build more courts and court rooms. We have launched a massive Justice Square Project. I wish it was more advanced or that it had further progressed, but I am grateful that we have started. Permit me to thank my colleague Senator Dorothy Lightbourne, who fought to see the Justice Square Project get off the ground. 

A few weeks ago, I opened a Courthouse in Lucea, Hanover, that will serve the Family Court- a state of the art courthouse. As I reflect upon this, I cannot help but think that we have to make better use of our courts and the time available in them. Some time ago, in about 1991, when many of you were still small children, the current President of the Court of Appeal, Honourable Justice Panton and I got the opportunity to tour the New York City Law Department. I remember very vividly, at about 10 o’clock in the night we were taken to a Night Court in Downtown Manhattan. Wondering what on earth we could be possibly doing at the Court at that hour we were informed that that was the time when the next shift of Judges and Court personnel took over and we would get to see the changeover.  This to me was immaculate! The Court sat 24 hours per day in 3 shifts of 8 hours. Can we imagine if we had 8 hours of judicial activity in every Court?

I have said this publicly before, and I say it here, that we have to find a way to make optimum use of our Courts - for the Judges, the Lawyers, the Prosecutors, the police, and especially for the litigants and witnesses, and to be courageous in this knowing that courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear, not absence of fear. We need not be afraid to try new things if we see where they can make our situation better. 

I’m not suggesting that we have a 24 hour court system but at present we have a system where the Court is being utilized at an average of less than five (5) hours a day.  Is it possible for us to have a system where we have two shifts operating in the Court- one in the morning and one in the afternoon? Is it possible to start the Court day at 8:00 a.m. or 8:30 a.m. similar to the private and public sector, running until about 12:30 p.m. with a break in between and then a second shift at 1:30 p.m. to about 5:00 p.m.? 

I see with this a situation where we can have two or more  panels of Court of Appeal Judges sitting each day maximizing the rate of disposal of Appeal Cases and allowing judges more flexibility and efficiency in structuring their days. This too for the Supreme Court and the Resident Magistrates Courts. Judges, lawyers and prosecutors spending less individual time in the courtroom and achieving more collective time in court usage, and work.  Giving lawyers more time within the work day to prepare their cases, judges more time within the work day to prepare judgments instead of this being done in many instances, outside of the work day.  How do we find the right arrangements? I foresee that this can be an avenue through which we not only reduce the backlog, but open up more space for new lawyers to share in the work of the justice system.

I’m not saying I have the answer, I’m saying that we need to look at the reality, be pragmatic and dare to try new solutions.  I dare say that a better investment for money might be in securing more prosecutors, more Resident Magistrates and more Judges so that we can fuel a system that allows us more  productive usage of our time and time in our court buildings, than it might be to build more structures.  Investment in the human capital might more valuable.

You are looking for ways that you can contribute to the justice system- that is the reason many of you have selected this profession. Do not think that because you are young in experience and in age- that you have nothing to contribute, that your voice cannot be heard. As young lawyers you are looking for a place within this system in which you can build a livelihood- and a decent one at that. Speak out for the things that you would like to see happen or even changed. You are bright and sharp and may see solutions that many older ones who have been in practice for many years do not see, whether through comfort or complacency. None of us has an exclusive right to wisdom. 

I urge you not to be passive in your careers but to agitate for these things and for the things that you would like to see achieved that can benefit you and benefit your country.  Recall the symbol that stands atop the crest of this Law School- the Magnificent Frigatebird, otherwise known as a Man O’ War. Recall also the name of this Law School from which you are graduating, the Norman Manley Law School and the legal acumen, integrity, honesty and accomplishments of the man whose name it bears. Recall too, that this Law School was established as a beacon of Legal Education in the Caribbean not just to produce lawyers but to produce nation builders.  You are called to a profession with one of the longest traditions.

As I welcome you to this noble tradition I remind that you are called not only to uphold  uprightness but to push it forward!

I leave you with the words of Winston Churchill, Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.  

THANK YOU!