Chief Justice Bryan Sykes on Tuesday called for greater efficiency from key players within Jamaica’s justice system, pointing out that undue delays in cases before the court are a violation of individual’s constitutional rights.

“To our partners, those upon whom we rely to get documents in, particularly the forensic services, it is still taking too long to get the material in to the courts. And those responsible for the analysis of biological samples, particularly DNA, must recognise that when you have unnecessary delay in the hearing and disposition of a criminal matter — or even a civil matter — it is actually a violation of the person’s constitutional rights,” he said.

“When you have a delay in completing the record it affects the defendant in a very significant way. Sometimes they are unable to take up employment opportunities because the condition of bail may very well be you have to live outside of the parish or live in another community. And if that goes on for too long it in effect deprives that person of the opportunity to earn steadily,” the chief justice stressed.

Sykes made the comments as he endorsed and opened a new records office at the Corporate Area Criminal Court in Half-Way-Tree, St Andrew. He also launched six mediation centres which will be located at the Supreme Court along with the Kingston and St Andrew, St Catherine, Portland, St James and Hanover Parish courts.

The event marked another important step in the judiciary’s ongoing modernisation programme to improve the efficiency of court operations, strengthen records management, and provide greater opportunities for Jamaicans to resolve disputes.

Sykes used the occasion to hammer home the point that records are more than just sheets of paper, but “about real life, flesh and blood”.

The chief justice cited an example he observed in criminal court in St Mary to show the impact that delays can have on a defendant’s life.

“Based upon the assessment of my judicial colleagues, they decided that the person is not an appropriate candidate for bail at the time when the application was made. But the expectation was that after 12 months, six months, 18 months approaching two years, DNA results would be there. But oftentimes it isn’t,” said Sykes.

“And so, the gentleman is sitting there unnecessarily long and then what if the DNA comes back and he is exonerated? Who is going to give him back those 18 months? He can’t get it back. Can’t get back that two years. Can’t get back that six months. Timeliness from our partners must improve. The question of the analysis of electronic devices has to improve. When the file is incomplete it means the record is not complete. The parish court is a court of record. The Supreme Court is a court of record,” he stressed.

There have long been concerns that a lack of resources may be a factor in the inefficiencies within the system. Last year, then Director of Public Prosecutions Paula Llewellyn told the Jamaica Observer that in some instances State agencies that do DNA tests or analysis on computers or electronics for evidence are understaffed and have a high turnover rate, so these reports can take months.

In speaking, Tuesday, of ways to address the lag time now dogging the judicial system the chief justice argued that in today’s digital world there is the need for an integrated electronic case management system to be properly implemented and used locally.

Sykes pointed out that when proper records are unavailable, in the event a person is convicted or loses a civil dispute, the matter cannot be heard by the Court of Appeal. That body, he added has been signalling that delays are to be avoided if possible

“The court has been responding by reducing sentences because of the length of time it is taking to get the record in a state that it can be sent to the Court of Appeal,” said the chief justice.

He also pointed to a recent case in which a defence attorney also included the issue of undue delay in making his arguments.

“What the lawyer was saying was that it really doesn’t matter how strong the case is, this trial should not have taken place because of the length of time it took to get the trial started. A critical part of the time may very well have been getting the record in time and in a state to make the trial take place. Now, that argument is not a new one to the legal system,” said Sykes.

He anticipates that this line of argument will continue, hence the need for greater efficiency within the system.

Sykes provided examples of what obtains in other jurisdictions.

“In Canada, the Supreme Court there made, at the time it was considered a radical decision, that once the trials for certain offences did not take place within a certain time, then they couldn’t be tried. Some persons went to the Supreme Court of Canada to argue. Of course, the facts may have proven that I am guilty, but my charter right to a fair trial within a reasonable time has been violated. And therefore, my conviction should be overturned. So the completion of records is not just an academic exercise or something for judges alone,” the chief justice told the gathering of judges and court staff.