SPEECH BY
HONOURABLE LESTER B BIRD MP
PRIME MINISTER
AT THE OPENING OF
THE HALLS OF JUSTICE
IN ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA
ON
MONDAY, 15TH SEPTEMBER 2003

The opening of these new Halls of Justice is a significant step forward in the continuing process of delivering justice in our country.

Outmoded facilities make for outmoded justice.

There is no question that, while the previous Court House served justice well over a period of time, it had outlasted its usefulness. It was too small, too cramped, and lacked the technology so vital to today's age. In that regard, the old Court House was contributing to the delay in the delivery of justice.

And, the old adage still holds true: Justice delayed is justice denied.

Modern technology may not only accelerate the delivery of justice, it may actually improve the quality of judicial decisions. Any equipment or process which assists a judge in performing his duties helps him "free-up" his mind to better direct it to judicial thinking.

The technology provided here allows judges and magistrates to research laws and precedents on computer discs, or through the Internet. It literally opens up a whole world of case law, judicial experiences, and commentary to inform and improve decisions. Pleadings and documentary evidence are properly stored in the computer, and thereby easily retrieved by all users. Further, it allows for decisions to be written on a computer, for amendments to be made in an instant, and for several copies to be printed in a few minutes.

Our old Court House was not set up to accommodate such technology, but these new Halls of Justice are.

In this connection, interminable delays awaiting judgements or other decisions should now be things of the past.

My Government is pleased that, as part of its legacy to the people of Antigua and Barbuda, it has provided this facility in which their rights will be upheld, and the wrongs done to them addressed.

Our justice system has evolved rapidly over the years. Our country is a democracy where laws are created by the House of Representatives, a body of persons elected by the people to represent their views and interests. Ultimately, the people retain the right to determine whether some of these laws, or any of them, do indeed reflect their opinions. In circumstances where the people have decided that a law is unjust, they have, through their Members of Parliament, caused its repeal.

While this political process of accountability to the people is vitally important, the independence of those who interpret the law is singularly essential.

No person or institution should be above or beyond the law, and recourse to an independent Court, influenced only by the law itself, must always remain a foundation stone of our society. This is known as the Rule of Law.

These two independent branches of Government, the legislative and the judicial, working in tandem, are the guarantee of our rights and freedom both as a society and as individuals within it.

My Government has always been, and continues to be, firmly committed to the democratic process of law making, and to the independence of the judiciary in interpreting those laws.

We have recognised that, over the years, justice has sometimes been outside of the reach of many people. Not because they are denied recourse to the Courts, but because the cost of legal representation has become too high.

My Government recognised that a lack of access to timely and professional legal advice and guidance can be a contributing factor in creating and maintaining social exclusion in our society. Typically, it is the poorest in our society - the already disadvantaged and underprivileged - who suffer the most. Unable to afford the lawyers' fees, a Plaintiff might be unable to bring a suit to seek redress for wrong done to him, thereby allowing the perpetrator to get away with it. In Criminal Law, an offender could be given a harsher sentence simply because his case was argued inadequately. Either way, justice is not served well.

For those without access to legal help, there is no justice. And these Halls of Justice would mean very little to them. Indeed, this marginalisation of vulnerable groups and individuals triggers a downward spiral to social exclusion, creating two communities within our one society - a community to whom justice is assured, and a community to whom justice is denied.

Unless there is "Justice for All", there is no real justice. Unequal justice is, essentially, injustice.

It is to right this wrong that, despite the many demands which are being made on our scarce financial resources, my Government has introduced a Legal Aid clinic which we have manned, and which we are funding. It is open to all who cannot afford a lawyer. It is there so that even the weakest and poorest amongst us could seek justice to which he is entitled.

There are some key groups of people that we need to reach out to. For example:

• To the elderly pensioner facing problems;
  
• To the single mother who may be exploited by an unscrupulous employer or Landlord;
• To the first offender who may be capable of rehabilitation.
  

I take this opportunity to appeal to the Bar Association and all its members to participate in the work of the Legal Aid clinic.

If each lawyer donated two hours a week of his or her time to giving advice or making representation, they would lose very little, while doing much to build within our nation a society where justice is truly available to all, and where justice is truly served.

Mr Chairman, justice is as much about punishing those who offend the laws of the nation and threaten the well being of its people, as it is about protecting the innocent, and righting wrongs against the individual.

No country will long survive escalating crime, particularly violent crime. But small countries, such as ours in the Eastern Caribbean, would suffer far more from crime than other larger, and more well-resourced nations.

Crime has an adverse effect on tourism and investment. For twenty-seven (27) years, my Government has dedicated its greatest efforts, deployed its brightest minds, contributed its most significant resources, to develop these two pillars upon which our economy now stands. Our people now have a better life than their parents and grand-parents did, principally because of our successes in tourism and foreign investment. Yet it is these very two columns supporting our society which are the most vulnerable to crime.

Once the word spreads that crime in a country is increasing, there is a corresponding decline in the level of tourist arrivals and investment. Naturally, both tourists and investors become concerned about their personal safety and the security of their property.

But, beyond the adverse economic consequences of crime, every citizen of our country is entitled to a life unthreatened by crime. Every citizen has a right to expect protection of his property, and the security of his welfare and that of his family.

The Courts have a crucial role to play in this.

The Government and Parliament, responding to the concerns of the people in our society, have created laws to combat drug trafficking, illegal possession and use of firearms, burglary and break-ins, and anti-social behaviour such as grievous bodily harm and sexual assault.

The Police and other law enforcement agencies have a responsibility to arrest and charge persons who commit these offences. I am on record as urging them to redouble their efforts in this regard, for while our crime statistics on a per capita basis are better than most other countries in the world, one murder is still one murder too many; one rape, especially for its victim, is one too many. I am on record as saying that my Government has declared war on crime; and we mean it.

While drug trafficking and the possession of illegal firearms are serious crimes in themselves, the other crimes and social ills that they spawn threaten the welfare and livelihood of our country as a whole. They must, therefore, be stamped out.

The Courts have a crucial role to play in this.

Since a very large percentage of all criminal cases begin and end in the magistrates' court, the magistrates clearly have a great responsibility to the society to ensure that sentences reflect the deep concern of the people, that the severest appropriate penalties be imposed on offenders.

There are, of course, principles which guide judges and magistrates in the imposition of penalties. One of them is that where an offence, such as possession of a drug, is being committed for the first time by a young and immature person, or where a burglary may have been performed by a young person for the first time, the Court should be cognisant of the importance of trying to rehabilitate such a person. In such cases, alternatives have to be devised within the law and the sentencing system to allow for a more appropriate "fit" of the sentence to the individual crime.

My Government is even now considering legislation that could be adopted for "community service" sentencing for first offenders of certain types of crimes.

Additionally, some provision ought to be made where religious practices conflict with the law, such as the use by Rastafarians of marijuana in their religious rites. My Government is giving careful consideration to how this religious practice might be allowed to continue legally within a controlled environment. The problem is complex and will require checks and balances to ensure that there is no abuse. There is a compelling argument for considering it, and we will examine other societies where the use of marijuana for religious purposes is allowed in controlled circumstances.

Further, there is good medical evidence that use of marijuana may be one of the better medications for certain conditions - e.g. eye drops for the treatment of glaucoma; ganja tea to relieve the pain and nausea of cancer victims undergoing radiation therapy.

Notwithstanding these exceptions, there is still a need for the Court, particularly in the areas of drug trafficking and grievous bodily harm, to impose the stiffest appropriate penalties under the law. These two categories of crime are the two second highest after burglary and break-ins, and they are, by far, the most pernicious and damaging to our society. In a very large number of cases of grievous bodily harm, men have set upon women and either disfigured or maimed them. This vicious crime, whatever motivates it, must be curbed, and curbed swiftly.

I am keenly aware that much is asked of magistrates, and often they fulfil these tasks without the benefit of "judicial" training. This is particularly true in sentencing; for example, for some kinds of drug trafficking offences, where the law provides for both fines and confinement, only one punishment is imposed.

However, if we are to deal firmly with this destructive crime, the Courts must apply the full force of the law. A similar observation would apply to the possession, and especially the use, of illegal firearms.

In this connection, my Government is prepared to organise training programmes for magistrates both within our jurisdiction and overseas. We want the best magistrates making the best decisions within the law, decisions that are in the best interests of our society.

Anti-social behaviour is a recent but worrying phenomenon in our country. Young men, some as young as fourteen, have formed themselves into gangs. Some of them are involved in robbery, burglary, break-ins, and drug trafficking; three of them are suspected of murder. They have even disrupted schools.

We are also seeing the introduction of weapons, particularly knives, in schools. They are used to threaten the weak and vulnerable, and as an instrument of bullying and coercion. This anti-social behaviour should be dealt with firmly by both the Police and the Courts. There should be no lenient approach by the courts to such behaviour.

The courts have a duty to come down hard on those who continue to bring fear, distress and misery to their local communities. To do otherwise denies those communities the protection to which they are entitled.

Mr Chairman, justice cannot be divorced from the context in which it is being delivered. Unfortunately, we live in an age of unrestrained communication and porous borders.

Our small society is being bombarded with the cultural ailments of bigger countries, which, however, have far greater resources than we do to manage their problems in every area, including law enforcement.

We will never be able to resist all of these social diseases, but we can at least try to protect our society from their worst forms. Certainly where their importation, imitation and execution violates our laws and offends our society, they must be weighed in the scales of justice and dealt with appropriately.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the Halls of Justice that we open today are the bastions from which the rights of each person in our society is upheld and protected. They are the structures which support the rights and values of the society. They must be protected, maintained and preserved.

Before I close, it is incumbent upon me to thank Fares Hadeed and Company and in particular His Excellency, Ambassador Sir Ramez Hadeed, for taking the entrepreneurial risk in building the new Government Complex of which these Halls of Justice are a part. When I called upon the business community in Antigua to come forward and demonstrate some confidence in, and commitment to, our country, the Hadeeds stepped up to the plate. They put up their money to build this "BOOT" project, and will own and operate it while we make our scheduled payments; on completion of payments, they will transfer ownership to the Government.

I am proud to declare these Halls of Justice open.

May justice flow down from them as sweet rain upon our country and nourish our democracy.

I leave you with a short quotation from Reinhold Niebuhr from a foreword to a book written right after the Second World War:-

"Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible,

But man's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary."