EDITORIAL: Decisive action needed in extradition matters

Recent events have called into question the competencies of judicial functionaries in both the Attorney General's (AG) Chambers and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP). During the recently concluded Manatt commission of enquiry, the public witnessed, first hand, the full breadth of the tension and fractured relationship that exist between these critical departments as witnesses engaged in name-calling and throwing jabs at each other.

Despite what has been perceived as an untenable situation, there is no indication that anything was done by the powers that be to smooth over things and tone down the rhetoric between personalities at the AG's Chambers and the ODPP.

Thursday's release of a murder suspect wanted in the United Kingdom, allegedly as a result of the mishandling of the case by the two departments, only serves to strengthen the perception that the nation's judicial affairs are not being well managed. It also lends support to those who charge that the departments run by Attorney General Dorothy Lightbourne and DPP Paula Llewellyn are in disarray.

But even before that, the reputation of the ODPP suffered considerably after public spats with Contractor General Greg Christie and INDECOM head Terrence Williams. It is rare to hear public officials trashing each other, but the appraisal of the ODPP offered by both men was worrying. Charges ranging from being slow to hesitant were levelled at the ODPP.

The functions of both the Attorney General's Department and the ODPP are imbued with public trust, and the country expects that their conduct and actions will contribute to the strengthening of the criminal justice system as mandated by the Constitution and the law.

request overturned

Britain is likely to flex its diplomatic muscles after Thursday's decision by the Full Court to quash the arrest warrant for forklift operator Vincent Ashman and free a man who is wanted by British authorities for murder. This is after the accused originally waived his right to a hearing and agreed to be sent back to face his trial.

The process of extradition is largely a political one, and is bilateral in nature, but its success involves interposition of the judiciary in both the requesting and the extraditing countries.

And although this is a serious matter that is likely to provoke tensions between two friendly nations, we do not expect anyone to be punished for incompetence because there is no proper structure within the public sector to deal with dereliction of duty and incompetence. The lawyers from the Attorney General's Department and the ODPP will continue to point fingers at each other, but they will remain firmly ensconced in their positions.

The court heard that in February, Ashman filed an application in the High Court for the arrest warrant to be quashed. At that hearing, orders were made for the Attorney General's Chambers to file an affidavit in the matter, but the order was not complied with. So who is to blame for the unravelling of this case? And what action will be taken? Please, Mr Prime Minister, no commission of enquiry is required for this one; only decisive action.

Since the extradition of Christopher Coke, there have been heightened discussions about extradition treaties with suggestions that the current treaty with the US, for example, is heavily tilted in favour of the superpower. If that is the case, the prime minister needs to move swiftly ahead and get its diplomatic experts to hold bilateral talks with a view to securing the modifications to the treaty that would ensure that, at the end of the day, the judicial system will afford due process in equal measure to all citizens, as it was intended.

However, Jamaica must avoid actions that may label it as a rogue nation willing to give succour to suspects or convicts who would want to seek haven in this country.

The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.