Dear Editor,
I write unfortunately, to register my concern at the functioning of our Courts and more especially the High Court. If you should visit the High Court on any morning or afternoon you will find that most of the Court rooms are closed and the work that one expects to be going on is totally absent. Let me at the outset state that this letter is not meant to be any criticism of Chief Justice Ian Chang (ag) for he can only work and try to administer the Court with what he has at hand and he is new as regards administration of the High Court.
There should be a complement of twelve judges for the High Court but there is a shortage of two and within the next nine months there will be another two judges who will be retiring.
At the moment there are only five high court judges, including the chief justice, on duty in Georgetown and two of them are at the criminal assizes. Four judges are on leave and one judge is on duty in Essequibo. One of the judges in Georgetown Mr Rishi Persaud is doing the Bail Court matters, sitting in the Full Court, hearing undefended divorces, trying some civil cases and on Fridays travels to Berbice to do the Bail Court list there. This is indeed what I call over-working but more importantly the question is what amount of time does he have to concentrate on adjudication, read cases cited and come up with reasoned decisions.
The backlog of cases keeps rising and the amount of injustice that this brings is indescribable as when matters come up for trial six years or more after request for hearing is filed, you will find that parties and or witnesses are dead or cannot be located!
But the injustice for parties before the Court does not end there as the conduct of some judges in failing to deliver their decisions and write their memorandum of reasons within a reasonable time goes without any sanction from the Judicial Service Commission, the constitutional body responsible for the appointment and sanctioning of our judges.
There is a case where one of the parents, who were separated, petitioned the court for legal custody of a minor child.
The case commenced and was put down for the learned judge to decide. The minor child was then about ten years of age and the parents are still waiting for this judge to determine which of the parents should have custody. That minor child has now become an adult and is soon to graduate from the University of Guyana. This case is not singular in our system and I ask the question who should bear the blame for this outrageous conduct.
The Chancellor is the person who now has supervising power over the chief justice in relation to the distribution of work in the High Court and as such should among other things see-
The list of cases that were assigned to each judge.
How many cases were concluded and in what time.
The reasons for those that were not concluded.
Whether the memorandum of reasons are submitted in a timely way.
Whether the judge’s note book is submitted in criminal cases where there is an appeal.
Ensure the smooth administration of working of the Courts.
Where the chancellor finds that the conduct of a judge needs correction and this is not done by any judge after being notified by the chancellor then the chancellor can ask the Judicial Service Commission to take such action as it deems fit and necessary. The Judicial Service Commission can on its own initiative take action where it thinks fit. I make this point because all the ills that I have alluded to before are all known to the current members of the Judicial Service Commission. The tragedy is that it does appear that the Judicial Service Commission seems ineffective as the position that permeated the system in relation to recalcitrant judges has remained and no former and or current judge has been disciplined. Chancellor Carl Singh (ag) has been in the position of acting chancellor and chairman of the Judicial Service Commission for over three years now and there is no excuse why action has not been taken.
It is my view that the Judicial Service Commission needs new blood and that the two members who have been there for over a decade need changing. The system needs the prompt appointment of new judges who have had the experience that would make them an asset to the judiciary.
I have been informed that one such potential appointee after having been invited to apply to be appointed a judge, has been asked to submit a letter of recommendation and on a matter of principle he has refused. I agree with him and unless his appointment is to be permanent, he should not accept it. We have too many actors already!
Mr Rooplall, the current Land Court Judge in Georgetown should be appointed a judge of the High Court. He was appointed a magistrate in 1995 and Land Court Judge in 2004 and has demonstrated by his manner and conduct that he would be an asset to the judiciary. Apart from his work he acts and speaks the way a judge should and I cannot comprehend the reluctance of the Judicial Service Commission to appoint him. Members of the Judicial Service Commission you need to be more pro-active.
I am also bewildered why the powers that be have not put in place all that is further required for the appointment of part-time judges. I know that senior members of the Bar who are in private practice will make themselves available and if this is implemented then the backlog can be constructively tackled.
Yours faithfully,
K.A.Juman-Yassin
Attorney-at-Law
