EDITORIAL - Listening to Justice Panton

Correction & Clarification

The editorial incorrectly stated that the Court of Appeal sat for 41 days in 2010, and is scheduled to sit for 40 days in 2011. That should have been 41 weeks in 2011 and 40 weeks in 2012. We regret the error.

-------------------------------------------------

Having found the money to fix the photocopier at the Supreme Court and overseeing the repair, Justice Minister Delroy Chuck perhaps has the time to pay attention to a larger problem raised by Justice Seymour Panton.

Indeed, both the Government and the Opposition should be listening. So, with an election in the air, the timing of the judge's outcry is propitious.

According to Justice Panton, there are too few appeal judges to hear and adjudicate matters in a timely manner. Or, even when arguments are heard, the judges are not finding sufficient time to write their rulings.

This, of course, means delays, which add to the more than 450,000 cases that clog Jamaica's court system. There is consensus that this backlog helps to undermine confidence in Jamaica's justice system and weakens democracy. For, when people can't rely on the formal system for reasonably swift delivery of redress, they are likely to resort to alternative methods, including, in some cases, vigilante action.

MORE JUDGES

Justice Panton's solution is for the appointment of another panel of three judges. This would bring the number of judges on the Court of Appeal to 10, including the president himself, who, apart from being a sitting judge, also has administrative duties.

But according to Justice Panton, who has been in the job since July 2007, the court has for years made this request, to little avail. Indeed, Jamaican administrations have been slow to provide resources to the court system, generally.

Yet, it would cost little to increase the number of appeal judges: Parliament's amendment of legislation to effect the change, the allocation of perhaps $30 million-$40 million in compensation, and a little bit of refurbishing of the Court of Appeal building to create chambers for the new justices.

The payback, however, is potentially significant.

According to the Court of Appeal's website, last year, the justices sat 41 weeks of the year. They delivered 141 judgments, 63 in the criminal division and 78 in the civil. A cursory examination suggests that a large number of these cases would have been in the appeal system for around three years. This year, the appeal judges are scheduled to sit 40 weeks. So far, they have posted 70 judgments, 44 civil and 26 criminal.

Assuming that the justices worked at the same pace their colleagues did last year, the court, with an additional panel, would be expected to deliver far more judgments. You could also reasonably expect to hang around in the appeal system for between 12 and 15 months' less time than is currently the case.

MORE CONFIDENCE

But more important, if something akin to these returns were realised, there would be increased confidence in the judiciary and a lowering of the cost to ordinary Jamaicans and to the business of accessing justice.

We, like Justice Panton, are at a loss why with a legislature and administration so full of lawyers, these recommendations have not been implemented. Except, perhaps, that even more than an appreciation of the nobility of the law and the concept of justice, there are few things lawyers appreciate more than hearing themselves speak - on anything.

Maybe with an election in the air, prospective legislatures will not only talk, but listen long enough to hear what's important.