Justice reform heats up

THE GOVERNMENT’S first major step in addressing the state of the criminal justice system was the restructuring of the ministry of national security. The second was the anointing of a permanent commissioner of police. The third, and most surprising, however, is its move to introduce a chancellor in the judiciary. This needs careful thought, detailed explanation and robust scrutiny. Any far-ranging proposals will also require extensive consultation.

The forum at which the Prime Minister on July 7 first introduced the country to the notion of a new official overseeing “the day-to-day logistics and running of the courts” was not ideal. (There is no explicit mention of a chancellor in UNC manifesto documents.)

Speaking at a UNC rally held at the Penal Secondary School, Ms Persad-Bissessar insisted that “the Chief Justice will still be in charge” and “will focus on managing legal cases and overseeing judges, magistrates, masters, and other judicial personnel.” But currently, she said, he is “hindered from his core function of delivering judgements and monitoring judicial appointees.”

“We can fix the operations at the judiciary, but the Chief Justice requires fit-for-purpose human resources.”

None of this is subject matter suited to the vagaries of a political platform. The judiciary is a sensitive organ of the state. A bright line needs to be drawn and maintained between it and partisanship. Too often in our history have party politics stood in the way of progress in matters of reform. As inherently political as the issue of crime is, the government should be more circumspect to give its efforts at change the best chance, especially if it is to court special-majority support.

Yet, the forum, as well as the timing of Ms Persad-Bissessar’s announcement well ahead of the resumption of the parliamentary term after the annual break, was also a sign that she is testing the waters. The proposal is simultaneously set in stone yet subject to review; the Law Reform Commission has prepared a note, Attorney General John Jeremie has issued instructions, but legislative drafting is not finished.

This may go some way to explain the paucity of granular minutiae, which on July 9 led to even opposition senator Faris Al-Rawi declining comment. “We can’t tell you what it is,” he said. “We are calling for details.” Understandably. For instance, will the JLSC appoint the chancellor? Or cabinet?

In its manifesto documents, the UNC promised “a national consultation on crime and criminal justice within one month of forming the government.” It has not met that promise. With much catching-up to do, it is now ratcheting up its efforts. As it does so, it must take care not to lose sight of vital details needed for citizens to judge.