After emailing a few criminal lawyers with a request that they might have time to sit with me and discuss the legal system in Barbados, or wouldn't mind me following a trial of their's, I received a welcoming reply from Mr. Steve Gollop, who invited me by his office.
Happy to be given the chance to learn as much as I can of the Barbados legal system, I attended Steve's office and after over an hour of asking questions, he invited me to watch a case at the High Court. The following are my observations and the knowledge I gained throughout two visits to the Supreme Court and several conversations with both Steve and a High Court Judge.
In comparison to the highest court of appeal courthouses I have visited throughout the world, the Barbadian Supreme Court, in itself, does not leave me too much to write about. The walls were not lined with books of authorities, as they were in India. The interior of the building was not lined with marble, like in Malaysia. It was far better built and had AC, if I were to compare it to Nepal. It was only slightly younger than the one in Australia, having only opened 4 years ago, and much more modern than the Canadian or Kenyan Supreme Court. Beyond the British influence, I do not think I could easily compare it to UK.
The Supreme Court in Barbados has three floors. The first was used for Criminal law matter, the third for Civil matters, and the second allowed for second floor gallery seating for the first. There was a cafeteria built but it is not in use, which I was told by a reporter, 'is a long story'.
The front had many windows and balconies, open to the public, while the courtrooms were in the back half. All walls were white or beige, with very few photos or paintings hung. There is a dome shaped structure in the center, not unlike Malaysia's but smaller. Hosting a great number of courtrooms, barristers described the new building as 'an unpractical waste of space,' but I am not so sure, I would be so harsh :)
In contrast, the defense counsel sat next to the jury and opposite the jury was a bench available for media and law students, which is where I sat. Separating me from the bar, was the witness box, which stood alone and faced the jury.
There were 2-3 bars, dependent on the courtroom. As Barbados is one of 3 Caribbean islands and possibly only one of 4 or 5 countries which still appoint Queen's Counsel, the first bar, which sits closest to the judge, is reserved for QCs only. The second bar is for all other barristers and solicitors. If there is a third it is for instructing counsel and or students.
Another thing I noticed and wondered why we didn't all do, was an overhead at the witness box. When a barrister asked the witness to read off of a letter which was later entered into evidence, he placed this piece of evidence onto the overhead which was projected onto 4 flatscreen tvs in the courtroom, allowing everyone to see exactly what he was looking at or reading from. Not everything was displayed, only that which was entered into evidence and it was turned on for such documents.
Final, security, like in all courthouses in Australia and in the Supreme Court of Canada (only), and Supreme court in India, required I walk through a medal detector and have my bag scanned.
Very much the same to all common law jurisdictions, however, while not quite as laid back as Nepal (I witnessed both defense and prosecution standing at the same time and arguing during a Supreme Court case, here), far more relaxed than Canada, Malaysia or India, and even more so than Australia.
Laptops were not commonly used, however I was told internet was accessible in the courtroom.
Court room decorum was much the same, however, there were more jokes shared, comments made in a passive manner and the dialogue seemed far more like a conversation between counsel and a judge than it did a formal procedure. During recess the judge asked me to approach the bench, and we had a good chat for quite some time. Something that has never happened in any other high court. I will discuss this in more length below.
As the Judge was very open with his views, I will refrain from mentioning his name, as I feel it is more important to share the substance of the conversation than the specific source.
He introduced himself, welcomed me to Barbados and his courtroom and asked if I had any questions...
I asked what the most commonly prosecuted offence in Barbados was.
He replied: Robbery and theft mostly, followed by assault. Very little first degree murder.
I asked what he felt of sentences in Barbados in comparison to other jurisdictions. Did he feel they were harsh? What was his view on mandatory minimums?
He replied- he didn't find Barbados particularly harsh. He was strongly opposed to mandatory minimums in that they took power away from the judiciary violating the separation of powers and could not be justly used to blanket all cases of the same sort without consideration of the facts. In order to get around such injustices, he would reinstate that he is legally bound to consider a presentence report, when submitted, with passing judgement in all decisions and would use the PSR to mitigate the crime with justifying his sentence.
I asked if prosecution would appeal these decisions on a matter of law.
He replied- very rarely. We are after all, here for the same reason. If the decision is found to be fair, it is left alone. Two of our biggest concerns are with marijuana cases and possession of a firearm and/or ammunition. I suspect the case currently before the Caribbean Court of Justice will assist greatly with this.
I asked if they held a strong focus or consideration with rehabilitative measures when passing down a sentence.
He replied, that they are trying to more and more and are currently in the midst of trying to create a drug court, with the help of research and assistance of Canadian lawyers from Toronto. Young offenders fell to young offender legislation and dealt with in a similar manner to Canada.
I asked what he thought was the tie between Canada and Barbados, politically, legally and economically, as one could not fail to notice the strong ties with all but one of their banks being Canadian, their fundamental rights, being very similar to those in Canada, the ads in the paper offering visas to Barbadians willing to move to Canada to work various jobs....
He replied- with a smile- legally this is a very easy question. Our first Prime Minister studied at the London School of Economics and was very good friends with Pierre Trudeau. When Mr. Trudeau was strengthening your Bill of Rights with entrenching the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, he was still very close with Barrow. They shared similar views and interests and they both left a significant impact on our legal systems which is apparent today.
(I smiled at the thought of Canada once having a Prime Minister worthy of a foreign national's positive acknowledgement).
He added, Barbados didn't ever federalize our banking system, which allowed for Canadian banks to move into Barbados. The same policies implemented in Canadian banks years ago, with their stricter lending practices where adopted as regulations here in Barbados, and were of great assistance with the recession.
He asked if I thought Canada would decriminalize marijuana.
I replied, that I hoped so, British Columbia, will lead the way if it happens, but federally, I was not sure why this had yet to happen or if it would.
He commented. I have been following the work to do so over there -the argument for it here is that even if the sentence is very light, having a criminal record is a larger set back in life than we are appreciating, most especially for young offenders and those carrying small amounts.
I asked if they had AA, mental health courts or programs assisting rehabilitative measures.
He replied- we have AA, we are a way from implementing a mental health court, but do push rehabilitative measures in sentencing where applicable.
We exchanged emails and a hand shake before I returned to my seat. With being only an hour late (early in Barbados), the witness was ready to give evidence.
Link to Constitution of Barbados: http://www.oas.org/dil/The_Constitution_of_Barbados.pdf
Happy to be given the chance to learn as much as I can of the Barbados legal system, I attended Steve's office and after over an hour of asking questions, he invited me to watch a case at the High Court. The following are my observations and the knowledge I gained throughout two visits to the Supreme Court and several conversations with both Steve and a High Court Judge.
The Court House
In comparison to the highest court of appeal courthouses I have visited throughout the world, the Barbadian Supreme Court, in itself, does not leave me too much to write about. The walls were not lined with books of authorities, as they were in India. The interior of the building was not lined with marble, like in Malaysia. It was far better built and had AC, if I were to compare it to Nepal. It was only slightly younger than the one in Australia, having only opened 4 years ago, and much more modern than the Canadian or Kenyan Supreme Court. Beyond the British influence, I do not think I could easily compare it to UK.
The Supreme Court in Barbados has three floors. The first was used for Criminal law matter, the third for Civil matters, and the second allowed for second floor gallery seating for the first. There was a cafeteria built but it is not in use, which I was told by a reporter, 'is a long story'.
The front had many windows and balconies, open to the public, while the courtrooms were in the back half. All walls were white or beige, with very few photos or paintings hung. There is a dome shaped structure in the center, not unlike Malaysia's but smaller. Hosting a great number of courtrooms, barristers described the new building as 'an unpractical waste of space,' but I am not so sure, I would be so harsh :)
The Courtroom
The courtroom was unique to any other I have seen. With many commonalities to others, the bench was of course to the front, with the judge having his or her own access to the room (although, this was not so in Nepal), there were 2-3 bars for barristers, and the accused sat in a box behind the bar, with the audience not far behind and additional public seating offered above.
In contrast, the defense counsel sat next to the jury and opposite the jury was a bench available for media and law students, which is where I sat. Separating me from the bar, was the witness box, which stood alone and faced the jury.
There were 2-3 bars, dependent on the courtroom. As Barbados is one of 3 Caribbean islands and possibly only one of 4 or 5 countries which still appoint Queen's Counsel, the first bar, which sits closest to the judge, is reserved for QCs only. The second bar is for all other barristers and solicitors. If there is a third it is for instructing counsel and or students.
Another thing I noticed and wondered why we didn't all do, was an overhead at the witness box. When a barrister asked the witness to read off of a letter which was later entered into evidence, he placed this piece of evidence onto the overhead which was projected onto 4 flatscreen tvs in the courtroom, allowing everyone to see exactly what he was looking at or reading from. Not everything was displayed, only that which was entered into evidence and it was turned on for such documents.
Final, security, like in all courthouses in Australia and in the Supreme Court of Canada (only), and Supreme court in India, required I walk through a medal detector and have my bag scanned.
Courtroom Procedures
Very much the same to all common law jurisdictions, however, while not quite as laid back as Nepal (I witnessed both defense and prosecution standing at the same time and arguing during a Supreme Court case, here), far more relaxed than Canada, Malaysia or India, and even more so than Australia.
Laptops were not commonly used, however I was told internet was accessible in the courtroom.
Court room decorum was much the same, however, there were more jokes shared, comments made in a passive manner and the dialogue seemed far more like a conversation between counsel and a judge than it did a formal procedure. During recess the judge asked me to approach the bench, and we had a good chat for quite some time. Something that has never happened in any other high court. I will discuss this in more length below.
The Little I learnt of Barbadian law
- They have very few mandatory minimum sentences. One which gives the greatest grief is possession of a fire arm or ammunition, which currently carries a minimum of 7 years. However, at the time of writing this, this law has been challenged and likely defeated, judgement is soon to be passed down.
- There are three levels of courts, with an option of appealing to the Caribbean Court of Justice, which has replaced the Privy Counsel. The convention empowering this court has only been ratified in three islands (Guyana and Blize are the other two).
- Prior to attending court, I asked if I could go by the office and read the case I was going to follow. In reading the submissions, I noticed 3 Canadian authorities and 2 UK authorities mentioned in the absence of a Bajan equivalent. I wondered if because Barbados is so small and young, if they accepted Commonwealth jurisdiction precedents. I was told Barbadian cases are the only cases which are authoritative. However, Canadian, UK and other Caribbean authorities are highly persuasive, due to their similarities.
- Barbados has a Charter of Rights and Freedoms entrenched in their Constitution. While it is not called a Charter, nor a Bill of Rights, it is under the heading "Fundamental Rights and Freedoms of an Individual." It is found in Chapter V, sections 11-27 and includes protection of life and personal liberty, protection from slavery or inhuman treatment, protection for deprivation of property, arbitrary search or entry, secure protection of law, freedom of conscience, expression, assembly, association and movement and protection from discrimination.
- There was no COR court and appearances were dealt with in the same courtroom as trials, in between of such matters, much like they were prior to Ontario implementing such a procedure. I am not sure what Canada does in the Supreme Court?
- The act of appointing QCs is still in practice, with the most recent appointment being only a few months ago. However, I was told there is discussion of discontinuing such a practice as it has become highly political.
- I was told the Family Law in Barbados is modeled after Australian family law and the Criminal law, is much like Canada, with having the same rights and British influence.
- Wigs were used at least more than 15 years ago, but were never mandatory procedure.
- Young offenders are aged 11-17.
- Legal aid exists and I am told is accessible.
My Conversation with the High Court Judge
As the Judge was very open with his views, I will refrain from mentioning his name, as I feel it is more important to share the substance of the conversation than the specific source.
He introduced himself, welcomed me to Barbados and his courtroom and asked if I had any questions...
I asked what the most commonly prosecuted offence in Barbados was.
He replied: Robbery and theft mostly, followed by assault. Very little first degree murder.
I asked what he felt of sentences in Barbados in comparison to other jurisdictions. Did he feel they were harsh? What was his view on mandatory minimums?
He replied- he didn't find Barbados particularly harsh. He was strongly opposed to mandatory minimums in that they took power away from the judiciary violating the separation of powers and could not be justly used to blanket all cases of the same sort without consideration of the facts. In order to get around such injustices, he would reinstate that he is legally bound to consider a presentence report, when submitted, with passing judgement in all decisions and would use the PSR to mitigate the crime with justifying his sentence.
I asked if prosecution would appeal these decisions on a matter of law.
He replied- very rarely. We are after all, here for the same reason. If the decision is found to be fair, it is left alone. Two of our biggest concerns are with marijuana cases and possession of a firearm and/or ammunition. I suspect the case currently before the Caribbean Court of Justice will assist greatly with this.
I asked if they held a strong focus or consideration with rehabilitative measures when passing down a sentence.
He replied, that they are trying to more and more and are currently in the midst of trying to create a drug court, with the help of research and assistance of Canadian lawyers from Toronto. Young offenders fell to young offender legislation and dealt with in a similar manner to Canada.
I asked what he thought was the tie between Canada and Barbados, politically, legally and economically, as one could not fail to notice the strong ties with all but one of their banks being Canadian, their fundamental rights, being very similar to those in Canada, the ads in the paper offering visas to Barbadians willing to move to Canada to work various jobs....
He replied- with a smile- legally this is a very easy question. Our first Prime Minister studied at the London School of Economics and was very good friends with Pierre Trudeau. When Mr. Trudeau was strengthening your Bill of Rights with entrenching the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, he was still very close with Barrow. They shared similar views and interests and they both left a significant impact on our legal systems which is apparent today.
(I smiled at the thought of Canada once having a Prime Minister worthy of a foreign national's positive acknowledgement).
He added, Barbados didn't ever federalize our banking system, which allowed for Canadian banks to move into Barbados. The same policies implemented in Canadian banks years ago, with their stricter lending practices where adopted as regulations here in Barbados, and were of great assistance with the recession.
He asked if I thought Canada would decriminalize marijuana.
I replied, that I hoped so, British Columbia, will lead the way if it happens, but federally, I was not sure why this had yet to happen or if it would.
He commented. I have been following the work to do so over there -the argument for it here is that even if the sentence is very light, having a criminal record is a larger set back in life than we are appreciating, most especially for young offenders and those carrying small amounts.
I asked if they had AA, mental health courts or programs assisting rehabilitative measures.
He replied- we have AA, we are a way from implementing a mental health court, but do push rehabilitative measures in sentencing where applicable.
We exchanged emails and a hand shake before I returned to my seat. With being only an hour late (early in Barbados), the witness was ready to give evidence.
Link to Constitution of Barbados: http://www.oas.org/dil/The_Constitution_of_Barbados.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment