Guyana’s Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions are among senior legal officials who have rejected a suggestion by Senior Counsel, Ralph Ramkarran that jury trials should be abolished.
Writing in last weekend’s Mirror newspaper, Ramkarran said this move is necessary to reduce the possibility of guilty offenders escaping justice because of flaws and deficiencies in the justice system, opining that too many convictions are being overturned on appeal owing to several factors, including inadequate summing up by judges.
“The abolition will be too drastic. First try to improve the present system and if this fails then the abolishing of the system can be considered,” said Director of Public Prosecutions Shalimar Ali-Hack in an interview with Stabroek News.
Her views were echoed by others including Attorney General Anil Nandlall, President of the Guyana Bar Association Mohammed Khan, Attorney Nigel Hughes and Senior Counsel Bernard De Santos. They said that abolishing jury trials is similar to taking away the democratic right of citizens and that juries were not to be blamed for appellate court dismissals but the system. They called for the urgent revamping of the legal system and made several recommendations to aid in achieving this objective.
Stating that she did not share Ramkarran’s views on abolishing jury trials, the DPP said, “The jury system works in many countries throughout the Commonwealth but presently there are major issues in Guyana which need to be addressed. There are changing conditions in society. The present prevailing conditions are to be assessed and the appropriate changes made. Major issues need first to be addressed in trying to improve the present system such as quality of jurors and improving the quality of judges.”
Nandlall told this newspaper that he firmly believes that the decision to abolish the jury system in Guyana is one for the populace to decide and not government. “I cannot agree with Mr Ramkarran…,” he added.
Hughes said he could not think of a society where there was no trial by jury. He said, “Absolutely not! While I certainly believe that a lot of work needs to be done to revamp the current jury system I totally disagree with abolishing jury trials. They need to widen the pool of the jury selection that is employed, but the fact that convictions are overturned has absolutely nothing to do with the jury.
Several factors need to be looked at, he said, “police investigation, the prosecution, and the judges summing up… The premise on which Ramkarran based his article should be looked at and it’s the judges not on the jury. I have a real problem with him saying that; a big problem.”
De Santos, a former attorney general said, “Absolutely not!” He added: “The reasons which have been advanced by many persons that there are people walking free because the appellate court quashes the convictions is not a good enough reason. This has been going on for years and all that proves is that the system has been working. Juries just don’t let people off just like that so don’t blame them, blame the system because when a case is dismissed it’s for a number of reasons.”
He is of the view that “9 out of 10 times it is not the jury to be blamed for appeals that are allowed in the court of appeal. It is the judges summing up that are the cause the other one is an irregularity somewhere along the line.”
De Santos was very passionate about his views and said “People can get off for a number of reasons. Some because the prosecution’s case can be unreliable, there are mistakes, legal mistakes by the judges in their summing, but the thing is not to abolish the system what we should do is get better judges, make them [the judges] more familiar.
“Nobody questions the kind of cases that are put forward. Are our prosecutors skilled enough? Are our investigators skilled enough to bring the evidence to court? If you bring a half-baked case, you are you going to blame the jury because they acquit a man? Most unfair!” he said.
Citing Section 19, Chapter 10:01 of the Laws of Guyana, pertaining to qualification of jurors and the jury list, which was established since 1975 and remains unchanged to date, the DPP stated that there needs to be a review and upgrade of how jurors are selected. Under 1 (a) of that law it reads ‘if he is in receipt of an income, salary or wage which (together with any sum pain or allowed to him on his behalf for board or lodging or board or lodging supplied to him in or his behalf as one of the terms of his employment) amounts to a sum which is at the rate of not less than seven hundred and fifty dollars per annum;…”.
“Isn’t this ridiculous? Who works for $750 a week much less a whole year? We need to make adjustments first,” the DPP argued.
“Review the persons who are summoned as jurors to ensure they are in conformity with the legislation. Certain aspects of section 19 should be amended to conform with changes. The lawyers for both the prosecution and the defence must be able to question the jurors to assess their level of intelligence, biases,” she said.
Ramkarran in his article had referred to some common law jurisdictions such as India, Pakistan and Singapore which have abolished jury trials to defend his stance. He said that in many developed countries which had developed fair judicial systems, such as Germany and Italy, decisions in criminal trials are made by tribunals consisting of a few judges and some citizens sitting together and making decisions on the guilt or innocence of the accused and passing sentence.
All of the legal minds probed on this solution to the replacement of juries said that Guyana should not mirror any country’s position on the issue but use one that is geared for its social, economical and other factors.
“I believe jury trials have a place in society and while there are other countries which would have abolished it doesn’t negate the value of jury trials. There are a number of factors that has to be looked at but to say abolish jury trials is a retrograde step and cannot work for Guyana. The best of convictions are lost because of judge jury or prosecution so you cannot blame the jury alone,” said newly elected Head of the Guyana Bar Association, Khan.
De Santos rejected the idea of a tribunal. “We are not concerned about any other country. Put a panel of judges there and there are going to be prejudices…you can’t find any tribunal – three-man, six-man or ten men; there will be some kind of prejudice.”
Elucidating on his prior statement he said, “The problem with that is when you are going to try a cane cutter and you put 12 educated people you don’t have trial by peers anymore. They are going to look at that man’s conduct and judge him. You have begun with first determining him guilty until proving him innocent. ”
Nandlall stressed the importance of society playing a direct role in the legal system saying, “It is part of that legal system where the ordinary man plays a role. It is the only part of the legal process which allows a man to be judged by his peers and despite the changes through which the legal systems of the world has gone over the years many have retained it. The fact that it allows for people participation is overwhelming. To abolish jury trials is a contradiction of our movement,” he said.
“Advanced countries like the United States and the United Kingdom still have jury trials even to the extent that they preside over defamation cases, which we have dropped reducing it to only criminal cases.
“The Commonwealth Caribbean of which we are a part has retained the jury system. While in some jurisdictions it is more widely used than in others, the fact is that it has been retained. These are societies similar to ours in terms of historical experience as a people and as an economical state of affairs” he stated.
The consulted legal luminaries told Stabroek News that much work needs to be done to fix this country’s legal system and myriad suggestions were given ranging from improving the quality of judges, raising the salaries of DPP personnel, educating and sensitizing jurors through accelerated workshops and revamping the Guyana Police Force.
“It’s not a dirty game it’s the players that are dirty. Fix the system and fix it fast,” De Santos said.
“Definitely I would like to see improvements in our jury system. The jury pool from which we draw is very limited we need to review it. Our jury system has been frozen in an anachronistic mould and perhaps the time has come for us to review it with the aim of modernizing it,” the Attorney General said.
