T&T judiciary facing problems -CJ

(Trinidad Express) Let’s fix this now, Chief Justice Ivor Archie said yesterday as he outlined the problems facing the judiciary.
Among the issues Archie wants fixed is that the judiciary be allocated a certain fixed percentage or percentage range of the annual budget “over a medium to long-term horizon” as opposed to the current system of having it financed under the same model as ministries and Government departments. Archie said the judiciary is the legal arm of the Government and should not be regarded as just another ministry. He made the statement in the presence of President Anthony Carmona, Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar and Attorney General Anand Ramlogan during the ceremonial opening of the new law term at the Hall of Justice in Port of Spain. He said in fiscal 2014, the judiciary experienced a decrease in financial allocation compared to that of 2013, as well as the fact that no allocation was provided for the operation of the Family Court. That fixed percentage of money, Archie said, can be managed by the judiciary itself with the judiciary still being subjected to audit, accountable to spend the money for approved purposes. “Unspent funds can then be rolled over with a cap on retention so that we can have smooth cash flow and pay service providers. That seems to me to be a sensible way to run things. The truth is that if anyone tried to run a business the way we run the Government it would buss. We are now in the process of constitutional reform. It is an opportune time to revisit the relationship between Parliament, the executive and the judiciary and to place it on a solid and sustainable constitutional footing,” said Archie. With the decrease of funding in fiscal 2014, Archie said the judiciary sought to obtain an explanation for that decrease, but none was forthcoming resulting in major changes having to be made in its work programme this year. The consequence of this, the Chief Justice said, was that the judiciary had to request virements and transfers of funds to fulfill the obligations that were deemed to be of high priority. “Delays in receiving releases and delays in fulfilling requests for virements and transfers further compounded the matter. Not only were contractors not paid on time, but many essential projects and contracts came to an abrupt halt. Those that continued without payment did so in good faith. From the judiciary’s point of view it is not anywhere near ideal to have to depend on a contractor’s goodwill to undertake projects that relate to the functioning of the courts,” he said. He pointed out that the judiciary was further disadvantaged by the justification for not granting the allocations requested which is that ‘’we do not have the capacity to spend the funds’’.