Judges can't bail out cops

Peter Champagnie, GUEST COLUMNIST

The recent sentiment expressed by our commissioner of police on the subject of bail being granted by our judges without due consideration to all circumstances is demonstrative of Jamaica's critical problem of moving from a developing country to a developed country.

Too often persons in authority and in a position to effect meaningful change fail to examine the empirical data and seek to lay blame where it ought not to be.

The judges ought not to be blamed for the granting of bail to 'criminals' in circumstances where the police either fail to attend court or attend court without vital information on repeated occasions to support their opposition to bail.

I would invite the commissioner of police himself and those who join with him on his views to perhaps one day leave their offices and attend any court and observe the many instances where cases are either dismissed, bail is granted because of inordinate delays owing to the tardiness of proper presentation of evidence, or absence of police officers in court without reasonable excuse.

Indeed, one can easily refer to the recent case involving the accused charged with the murder of Christine Hewitt. After seven years, the police, through the prosecution, are nowhere closer to completing their investigations for the matter to be tried. Would it have been a proper thing in those circumstances for the accused to be remanded and not be offered bail?

POLICE COPOUT

One can also refer to the many instances where the judges at the Half-Way Tree court are told, through the prosecutor, that the police are opposing bail in matters and they will be on their way to court shortly to make their position known in greater detail. When inquiries are made by the judges where the police are coming from, the court is told they are travelling all the way from the Half-Way Tree Police Station.

The reality of the situation is that in the majority of instances, matters before the court are adjourned at the request of the prosecution primarily because of incomplete police investigation or non-attendance of police or their witnesses. The result, therefore, is that in the absence of any reasonable excuse, the judges are obliged to consider bail and preserve that which is stated in the Constitution of this land, viz, the right to liberty.

The recent empathy by Mr Dwight Nelson with the commissioner's views is unfortunate in the sense that it illustrates Mr Nelson's own ignorance of the real problem. In a recent radio interview, Mr Nelson, I recall, uttered words to the effect that the presumption of innocence that the legal fraternity has must be put in context with the practical reality.

Mr Nelson, in the said interview, went on to express the opinion that persons are given bail and return to the communities where they are observed committing crimes. It is against this background that he empathised with the commissioner and appears to lay blame at the feet of our judges.

Not so, Mr Nelson! The blame must be laid at the feet of those who observe persons on bail reoffending and do not provide statements to the police for the police to bring such information to the judges.

FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE

The presumption of innocence is not a mere term of art confined to practitioners of criminal law but, rather, represents a fundamental principle upon which any civilised society exists. It is enshrined in our Constitution. Perhaps Mr Nelson needs to be reminded that the constitutional rights of each and every citizen must be observed and is not limited or ceases to exist in one geographical location or one's station in life.

Politicians and police alike, who seek to lay blame at the feet of others, must first ask themselves whether enough resources are being allocated to the justice system for it to operate efficiently.

The time has come for us to recognise that just as how we boast and sell ourselves as having the best natural resources for tourism and other sectors, we need now to work towards creating an environment where we can say to the world that we have an almost crime-free society.

We need a fundamental shift in our mindset and approach. The reality is that attaching priority to the justice system and thereby reducing the crime rate is not seen as any type of vehicle through which there is an instant appeal to the electorate. The only type of vehicle at the moment appears to be a JEEP. Until then, we shall forever remain a developing state where the idea of migration becomes more attractive by the minute.

Peter Champagnie is an attorney-at-law. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and pcham pagnie@cwjamaica.com.