First the Bailiff, taken from the piece innocent and anonymous until proven guilty There's much could be said about the whole article and the importance of justice being seen to be done. However I want to focus on a sentence almost at the end of the piece. " On the subject of whether centeniers should be able to form part of the jury, the Bailiff commented that it was “not a problem” in his view, but that it could be for some members of the public".
Centeniers are police officers- they carry a warrant card and have pretty much the same powers as paid uniformed police officers at least within their own parish. In most civilised parts of the world the notion that police officers could sit on juries would be seen as dangerous and often disallowed. Police Officers in England and Wales used to be excused jury service until the changes in the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
The changes brought in in 2003 were challenged, see police jurors are a threat to fair trials. One judge said: "I do think the notion of opening up juries to those actually involved in the legal system is a step too far. When I say the legal system, I include police officers." Another said: "I think it's too far to have judges and policemen sit on juries... In a criminal case police in particular are not who you would want on a dispassionate jury."
Actually the problem with centeniers on juries is rather worse. Centeniers are the only ones who can bring charges. As such they are also part of the prosecution system. The concept of having police officers who are also prosecutors sitting on juries is a true challenge to the perception of impartiality of juries and the right of defendants to a fair trial.
The situation in Jersey goes one step further in its difficulties than the English system. Over there the understanding is that police officers, MP's judges who are called to serve on juries do so outside of any court where they have regular contact. In England and Wales what not to difficult, but in Jersey it is effectively impossible.
Couple all of that with the absence of private prosecutions and the Attorney General's unchallengeable ability to determine whether prosecutions can proceed (not in the public interest). Id say that really ought to be a concern for all members of the public, and it is hard to fathom how the Bailiff can so readily dismiss Centeniers on juries as "not a problem".
The second item that caught my attention was a comment on a twitter thread about having a population debate ahead of the coming elections in Jersey. Kevin Keen suggested a population debate. The interesting part is this.
In theory no States assembly can bind a future. Of course they do it all the time by undertaking long projects and capital builds that require maintenance or (bond repayments) for decades to come. But more worrying is the fact Chamber appear to think their debate is somehow a States policy making body.
I am also incredulous that any organisation is would want a subject of importance like population not to be debated ahead of an election. Incredulous unless of course that body though they could better manipulate the outcome post election by non democratic means? Is this where we have arrived in Jersey?
And it isn't an isolated example. Our new Chief Executive announcing his plans does so at the Chamber of Commerce. https://www.gov.je/News/2018/Pages/ChiefExecChamber.aspx?lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_feed%3BazhDyuz4QUO2aZvfFn3XqA%3D%3D
Of course the Chamber of Commerce is free to debate or not debate issues as they see fit. But this proximity of the Chamber to the States policy making is not a healthy thing. In many jurisdictions Civil Servants would not be permitted to make policy announcements to a private body without it first being released to Parliament. The UK Civil service management rules are published https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-servants-terms-and-conditions
"Principles
The central framework derives from the need for civil servants to be, and to be seen to be, honest and impartial in the exercise of their duties. They must not allow their judgement or integrity to be compromised in fact or by reasonable implication. In particular:
civil servants must not misuse information which they acquire in the course of their official duties, nor without authority disclose official information which has been communicated in confidence within Government, or received in confidence from others. They must not seek to frustrate the policies, decisions or actions of Government either by declining to take, or abstaining from, action which flows from ministerial decisions or by unauthorised, improper or premature disclosure outside the Government of any information to which they have had access as civil servants;
civil servants must not take part in any political or public activity which compromises, or might be seen to compromise, their impartial service to the Government of the day or any future Government;
civil servants must not misuse their official position or information acquired in the course of their official duties to further their private interests or those of others. Conflicts of interest may arise from financial interests and more broadly from official dealings with, or decisions in respect of, individuals who share a civil servant’s private interests (for example freemasonry, membership of societies, clubs and other organisations, and family). Where a conflict of interest arises, civil servants must declare their interest to senior management so that senior management can determine how best to proceed; and
civil servants must not receive gifts, hospitality or benefits of any kind from a third party which might be seen to compromise their personal judgement or integrity.
Neither the Civil Service Code (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-service-code/the-civil-service-code) nor this central framework is comprehensive. It does not deal for example with such issues as isolated neglect of duty, failure to obey a reasonable instruction or other forms of misconduct which may properly be dealt with under disciplinary arrangements."
No comments:
Post a Comment