ALL IS not well in the Jamaican justice system. We say this because there have been too many instances when the system fails to satisfy the best criteria of fairness and equity - and sometimes elementary competence.The most notorious case in recent times was that of 77-year-old Ivan Nettleford, mentally ill, and lost in the prison system for an incredible 29 years simply because of a clerical error in recording his name as Ivan Barrows.
That can be attributed to gross carelessness and a jungle of ineptitude in keeping track of inmates in the dungeons that pass for prisons in this country.
The case reported in yesterday's Gleaner is in another category however. It involves Everald Dunkley, a taxi driver of Oracabessa, St. Mary, who had pleaded guilty to the offence of obtaining $17,000 by false pretences.
Although he had made restitution and it was a first offence, Resident Magistrate Carol DaCosta sentenced him to 12 months imprisonment at hard labour to punish him for "deceitful activity", to protect the community from him, and to send a message to potential offenders that deceptive behaviour would not be tolerated.
The Court of Appeal has expressed surprise at what was clearly "harsh and manifestly excessive" punishment and ordered his release after he had served eight months in prison.
His attorney had argued before the Appeal Court that he had refunded the money, had shown penitence, and should not have been imprisoned without the option of a fine or the benefit of a suspended sentence.
It may be argued that the higher court righted the scales of justice in terms of adjusting the punishment to fit the crime, in all the circumstances. But the fact is that Mr. Dunkley need not have spent eight months in prison had the appropriate discretion been exercised from the bench.
Which raises another concern about the justice system - the availability to all persons of adequate legal representation before the courts. Justice Minister A.J. Nicholson acknowledged in the Senate on Friday that the Legal Aid system is faltering.
According to Mr. Nicholson, while the Legal Aid Act requires that persons who can contribute to their legal costs should do so, nobody is contributing. The prospect of this improving appears dim, however, as the plan is to further restrict the categories eligible for legal aid.
The taxi driver is fortunate that he could afford the legal representation to save him from the failings of the justice system. Mr. Nicholoson must do more than fix Legal Aid. The whole system must be rid of the aberrations that bring justice into disrepute.
