Sunday | March 11, 2001
Home Page
Lead Stories
News
Business
Sport
Commentary
Letters
Entertainment
Outlook
Showbiz

E-Financial Gleaner

Subscribe
Classifieds
Guest Book
Submit Letter
The Gleaner Co.
Advertising
Search

Go-Shopping
Question
Business Directory
Free Mail
Overseas Gleaner & Star
Kingston Live - Via Go-Jamaica's Web Cam atop the Gleaner Building, Down Town, Kingston
Discover Jamaica
Go-Chat
Go-Jamaica Screen Savers
Inns of Jamaica
Personals
Find a Jamaican
5-day Weather Forecast
Book A Vacation
Search the Web!

Appeals stall in RM courts - Lack of equipment, staff blamed for long delays

Barbara Gayle, Staff Reporter

Corporate Area Resident Magistrate's (RM) Courts have been disposing of at least 10,000 criminal cases annually, but an inadequate processing machinery has put a brake on the pace of appeal cases.

The RM Courts are suffering from a shortage of manpower and equipment, which is preventing the speedy processing of notes of evidence for those who have filed appeals.

Calvin Campbell, court administrator, admitted last week that shortage of staff and machinery had affected the quick processing of appeal cases from the courts.

Meanwhile, the case load has become staggering. Mr. Campbell said there were at least 14,000 new cases per year and litigants were always appealing.

Last year there were 14,444 new cases and the year before there were more new cases. He added that staff members were working overtime to reduce the backlog.

"We hope to clear the backlog in a short time," Mr. Campbell told The Sunday Gleaner.

Sunday Gleaner checks revealed that at times it takes up to a year to type the notes of evidence in a case in which an appeal is being made. The Court of Appeal cannot hear the appeals until the notes of evidence are filed. Also, lawyers have to wait on the notes of evidence to file the grounds of appeal.

Once a criminal case with all the relevant documents gets to the Court of Appeal, it is heard within three to six months.

Mr. Campbell said that at least 10,000 cases were disposed of annually and the number of cases brought forward this year was approximately 4,000. Last year, 14,000 cases were disposed of, including those brought forward from 1999. But there has been progress.

"One thing that has really encouraged me as court administrator is that last year we had no report of missing files and it tells me that the system is working," Mr. Campbell said.

Progress

He also explained that, despite the large number of new cases, it was the same number of staff members who had to prepare the notes of evidence.

He pointed out that when preparing the notes of evidence, which at times run into hundreds of pages, Resident Magistrates had to read and correct them. Those judges had limited time in which to do so because they were kept busy in court trying cases.

He also said that sometimes Resident Magistrates were transferred to other parishes and so time was taken up sending the notes of evidence to them to have them corrected after they were typed.

About a month ago, the RM Courts received two new computers to help accelerate the process. But there is still the need for at least four more computers, two for the courts office and two for the resident magistrates who could then correct the notes of evidence on the computers.

"More computers will definitely speed up the appeal process," Mr. Campbell said.

An official from the Ministry of National Security and Justice, who did not want to be named in this story, said on Friday that "financial constraints" prevented more people being hired by the courts and more computers being provided.

Integrity

Meanwhile some attorneys claim the integrity of the justice process could be jeopardised if the matter is not corrected.

According to attorney Bert Samuels, there are many complex cases in the courts and the authorities should ensure that verbatim notes are taken in those cases. Mr. Samuels said Resident Magistrates were overburdened with work and in addition they had to write their own notes of evidence.

He also explained that verbatim notes, in cases which attract stiff penalties, were essential, and that there were many instances in which the reasons given at the time of conviction in the RM Courts were not the same reasons given in the findings of fact which were submitted in the Court of Appeal.

Mr. Samuels said that such an occurrence could be avoided if shorthand writers were assigned to the RM Courts to take verbatim notes in complex cases.

Back to News








©Copyright 2000 Gleaner Company Ltd. | Disclaimer | Letters to the Editor | Suggestions