Letter of the Day | The Silvera sentencing – Open justice on display
Published:Wednesday | March 25, 2026 | 12:08 AM
THE EDITOR, Madam:
The chief justice’s decision to deliver his judgment in a public Gun Court sitting was historic and deserves the highest commendation. The Gun Court Act, now 52 years old, was passed in 1974 with unusual haste. Its mandate for closed-door hearings excluded the press, families of the accused, and even victims, justified mainly on the basis of ‘protecting witnesses’. This issue later reached the Privy Council, which accepted the witness-protection rationale and upheld in-camera hearings. Yet that same court, like our chief justice did earlier this month, now broadcasts all its sittings live, including the recent Kartel appeal.
In its 2021 decision in Hinds, the Privy Council underscored that open justice is essential to fairness and transparency, especially when a person’s liberty is at stake. They affirmed that any departure from public hearings requires strong justification.
Public frustration over closed Gun Court proceedings peaked during the recent case involving Jolyan Silvera, whose murder charge was reduced to manslaughter. The media led a sustained call for access, and the case naturally drew significant attention, as it involved a former member of parliament and the tragic death of a mother of two young children.
The Constitution itself is not responsible for the decades of closed Gun Court proceedings. The problem lies in the indecent haste with which Parliament enacted the law — a pattern of knee-jerk responses to crime that has repeatedly led to overly broad, sometimes draconian measures. In our pursuit of public safety, we have too often thrown out the baby with the bath water.
In delivering the Silvera sentence publicly, the chief justice walked the nation through the allegations, the accused’s version – expletives and al l– and the legal basis for the final sentence of 20 years and 10 months. The public witnessed how sentencing guidelines, precedent, time already spent on remand, and the mandatory reduction for a guilty plea all shaped the outcome. For once, the reasoning was transparent.
Section 16(3) of the Charter guarantees that all court proceedings shall be held in public, except in limited circumstances such as protection of minors, national security, or instances where publicity would prejudice justice.
By opening this proceeding to the public, the chief justice has unlocked the long-closed door of secrecy around Gun Court hearings. It is now for Parliament to amend the Gun Court Act and fully align it with the principle that open justice promotes fairness, transparency, and trust. The Silvera broadcast demonstrates the value of such openness: the public is no longer left to speculate. It is a clear win for justice.
As Baby Cham would say, “We get di ting now… Ra Ra.”
BERT SAMUELS
Attorney-at-law