KINGSTON, Jamaica – Minister of Legal and Constitutional Affairs, Marlene Malahoo Forte, today stood firmly behind retaining provisions for a minimum 15-year sentence for breaches of the new Firearms (Prohibition, Restriction and Regulation) Act 2022.

Responding to pleas from Opposition Senator Donna Scott Mottley, for the removal of the mandatory sentence, the minister noted that there is a process and there are guaranteed rights and rules in law which deal with the treatment of accused persons.

“So the discussion cannot take place in isolation. There is a standard of proof in criminal matters, which is beyond reasonable doubt,” she responded during the meeting of a Joint Select Committee (JSC) of Parliament review the proposed Act.

“It is important to be reminded that a person does not move from charge to conviction just like that, unless perhaps there is a plea of guilty and, even where a plea of guilty is made it is usually made under advisement,” the minister told the all-day meeting at Gordon House.

“I just want to make it clear. I don’t want anybody to misunderstand my position. I am not speaking to the use of the firearm, my views are different in that regard. I am speaking to the possession of the firearm. There is a very real world out there,” Scott Mottley told the committee.

“Lots of people know that people plant firearms every day on people: That people are forced to carry a firearm, because they have no choice. They can’t say no. And that there are circumstances, if raised, would allow some mitigation in sentence,” she insisted.

Senator Scott Mottley also recalled a case which came to her office involving three people in the back seat of a taxi, and when police decided to search the car one of them pushed a gun inside her handbag.

Opposition MP, Fitz Jackson, also raised some concerns about the possibility of innocent people who might be caught up such activities and because of the rush to punish end up being imprisoned.

“There is the risk of punishing persons who are innocent, I am not saying to let anybody off, but there is a need to minimize the chance of that happening,” Jackson argued.

Senator Malahoo Forte said that, although she appreciated the concerns raised by them, there is a process, and there are guaranteed rights and rules in law, which deals with the treatment of accused persons.

“So the discussion cannot take place in isolation. There is a standard of proof in criminal matters, which is beyond reasonable doubt,” she noted.

She stated that the administration, in the context of the murder rate and the way that the firearm has featured in the high murder rate, in terms of what has been happening on the ground around investigating offences, the atmosphere of intimidation, the difficulty in certain circumstances, many of the circumstances where the firearm is used, the presence of the firearm poses a risk.

“And while an accused is not entitled to incriminate himself, while there are rules about competence and compellability, we have to get to the stage where if information is available that will cause reasonable doubt to exist, then that information ought to be presented to the court. Because we can’t speak of the issue of injustice in pockets and in isolation,” she added.

She also noted that Section 42 (k) of the Criminal Justice Administration Act, which is part of the 2015 amendments which were piloted by former Minister of National Security, Peter, remains on the book and is not being amended by the new Bill.

He pointed out that the section provided that were a defendant has been tried and convicted of an offence that is punishable by a prescribed minimum penalty, and the court determines that having regard to the circumstances of the particular case it would be manifestly excessive and unjust to sentence a defendant to the prescribed minimum penalty for which the offence is punishable: “The court shall (a) sentence the defendant to prescribed minimum penalty; and (b) issue to the defendant a certificate, so as to allow the defendant to seek leave, to appeal to a judge of the Appeal Court  against the sentence”.

“So the view that the firearm poses almost an existential threat to the society is one that we may have to ask, are we divided on it? Because, you know, this law is seeking to almost reset to the position. We want to do it so justly, but to make it very clear that, given the harm that has been done and continues to be done, there can be no demilitarize zone in view of the firearm,” she added.

Minister of National Security, Dr Horace Chang, who chairs the committee, recalled that the issue had been debated extensively prior to the drafting of the Bill.

“The relevance of it is still there, in terms of someone who may have come into possession with a firearm inadvertently,  and I think the law covers that, but would prefer to have (more discussions).We will certainly bring further evidence to you,” he said.

The JSC will resume meeting at Gordon House again Thursday morning in its bid to have the amendments approved and written into law, at the earliest possible time.

The Firearms (Prohibition, Restriction and Regulation) Act 2022 was tabled in the House of Representatives on February 10, introducing harsher penalties for offences connected to the illicit trade, manufacture, stockpiling, possession and use of illegal guns.

The legislation is aimed at addressing the challenges being experienced in the country with respect to the proliferation of illegal firearms, and importantly, to increase the applicable penalties for breaches of provisions relating to prohibited weapons.

-Balford Henry