Fri | Oct 3, 2025

Appeal Court criticises authorities for delayed review of revoked gun licences

Published:Monday | May 20, 2024 | 9:52 AM
The appellate court held that the judge was wrong to have granted the respondent leave to apply for judicial review. - File photo

The Review Board of the Firearm Licensing Authority and the Minister of National Security have been strongly criticised by the Court of Appeal for failing to act within the stipulated period to review applications for the revocation of firearm licences.

“The court is alarmed by the number of aggrieved applicants for revocation of firearm licence who appear before the court complaining that the Review Board and the minister failed to act within the timeline stipulated in section 37A of the Act.

“It is hoped that the Review Board and the minister will conduct their statutory obligations following the statutorily stipulated period,” the court said last week.

President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Patrick Brooks, Justice Paulette Williams and Justice Nicole Foster-Pusey made the comments when they allowed an appeal brought by the Firearm Licensing Authority against a former policeman who in 2021 was granted leave in the Supreme Court to apply for judicial review of a revocation order by the FLA.

Based on the outline of the law, the appellate court held that the judge was wrong to have granted the respondent leave to apply for judicial review.

“He also erred in finding that the FLA was obliged to give a “gist of the reasons for the revocation,” the court ruled.

The court said “although the FLA has succeeded in its appeal, it is questionable whether it acted reasonably in pursuing this appeal, knowing that it had re-issued a firearm licence,” to the applicant. The court said that would affect the issue of costs.

The parties have been asked to provide written submissions for the court's consideration and ruling on or before May 24.

The court said it was important to note that it was almost at the completion of the oral arguments that "counsel informed the court, that after the appeal to this court had been filed that the minister had considered the applicant's appeal and instructed the FLA restore his licence". The FLA pursued the appeal although it knew that it had re-issued the licence to the applicant, the court said.

On March 5, 2002, the applicant who was then a serving member of the Jamaica Constabulary Force was granted a firearm's licence. During March 2012 to 2014 he did not pay the renewal fee.

He was arrested in 2014 and charged with various offences but was subsequently acquitted. He applied on August  25, 2015 before his acquittal, for renewal of the licence and paid the renewal fees which had been in arrears.

During 2016 to 2017, he again failed to pay the renewal fees and when he approached the FLA in July 2017 to pay the fees, he was informed that an investigation was being done into his tardy payments. He was allowed to keep the firearm pending the investigation.

The applicant informed the FLA that family commitments and financial hardship were the reasons behind his late payments. The FLA's investigations revealed that he had been arrested for the offences and had been suspended from the Jamaica Constabulary Force for three years pending the resolution of the cases.

In April 2018, he applied to renew the licence but his application was refused by the FLA and his firearm seized. On April 9, 2019, the FLA served him with a revocation order, dated March 19, 2019 stating that he was “no longer considered fit and proper to be entrusted with a firearm licence”.

He applied to the Review Board on April 25, 2019 but there was no response. In December 2020 he applied to the Minister of National Security but again received no response.

The former policeman then applied to the Supreme Court on January 19, 2021 for extension of time to seek leave to apply for judicial review. The judge granted the applications and also granted the FLA leave to appeal.

Attorney-at-law Courtney Foster instructed by Courtney N Foster and Associates represented the FLA.
The respondent was represented by Lemar Neale instructed by Nea/Lex.

-Barbara Gayle

Follow The Gleaner on X and Instagram @JamaicaGleaner and on Facebook @GleanerJamaica. Send us a message on WhatsApp at 1-876-499-0169 or email us at onlinefeedback@gleanerjm.com or editors@gleanerjm.com.