News

HUMAN-RIGHTS activists and some attorneys-at-law are contending that none of the concerns they raised two years ago about human rights and constitutional implications contained in the six anti-crime bills have been addressed.

Human-rights advocates and lawyers who attended a Gleaner Editors' Forum late last week charged that the changes were cosmetic.

"An overview (of the changes) on our behalf indicates that nothing significant was done, it was just window dressing," declared Executive Director of Jamaicans for Justice, Dr Carolyn Gomes.

"There were no significant changes," echoed attorney-at-law David Batts.

He cited the controversial 60-day detention proposals to amend the Bail Act.

"They have put in a provision which says that the person detained must be brought before the courts within seven days after being charged and every 14 days thereafter for the court to consider whether the act applies to the individual."

Batts argued that this changed nothing as far as the rights of accused were concerned.

Bills nonsensical

Batts contends that the new provision simply allows suspects who are charged for gun offences to go before courts for no meaningful purpose as the no-bail provision still applies.

"It's nonsensical!" he declared. "And what that will do is to double, maybe quadruple, the workload on the court and who the police have to transport back and forth to lock-up."

Batts contends that in the current circumstances, the court gives the prosecution a period within which to get itself in a state of preparedness.

"What this (the bill amending the Bail Act) is proposing is that every 14 days, the police have to haul these guys back to the lock-up."

Batts was supported by the legal officer in the Independent Jamaica Council for Human Rights, Nancy Anderson.

"People can be charged with lots of things, but if there is no evidence to support the charge or the evidence is weak, or the witnesses fail to show, these are matters before a judge to consider," Anderson argued.

"And that is why you have them (suspects) appear before a court for bail application so that the judge can consider the weakness of or strength of the case, but if they can't come before a judge for consideration for 60 days, then what's the use?"

The bills were dispatched to a joint select committee of Parliament after the Opposition, legal minds and human-rights activists assailed some of its provisions.

The deliberations disrupted smooth passage of the measures anticipated by the Bruce Golding administration.

Despite the opposition it encountered, the United States State Department, in its report released earlier this year, blamed the Government for failing to enact the proposed legislation.

Golding said he was determined to proceed with the debate on four of the six bills which do not trigger constitutional questions.

gary.spaulding@gleanerjm.com