By Barbara Gayle, Staff ReporterIT REALLY is an indictment on 'the powers-that-be' who have allowed the problems simmering at the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for the last 14 months to come to a boil, with the prosecutors staging a sick-out last week.
This was even after numerous red flags, warning bells, as well as recommendations from the Muirhead Committee, which probed the administrative affairs there.
Prosecutors in the DPP's office have long contended that the state of affairs there were untenable and they are unable to continue operating under such conditions.
They are equally concerned about the impact the problems at the office are having on the administration of justice in Jamaica. As such, they have made an impassioned plea to the relevant authorities to take steps immediately to address the numerous issues that are 'tearing' the office apart.
Kent Pantry, Q.C., Director of Public Prosecutions, when asked last Tuesday for a comment on issues raised by the prosecutors in a press release issued the day before, responded, through his secretary, that The Gleaner should "ask its usual source".
The following are some of the issues raised by prosecutors in the press release:
Since April 2002, there has been a breakdown of relations between members of staff and the Director of Public Prosecutions. This stemmed from a request from members of staff to the Director that he reconsider a decision to revert a member of staff to the Resident Magistrate's Court, as well as from subsequent attempts by the staff to obtain clarifications as to the chain of command in the office and the grievance procedures in force.
HIGH-LEVEL INTERMEDIARIES
The deterioration in the relationship between the Director and the staff continued despite the efforts of various high-level intermediaries who attempted to mediate.
While we have waited and waited for action to be taken, the desperate situations that need to be addressed continue unabated and deteriorate with every passing day.
In citing examples, the prosecutors' statement said further that:
(a) Since an initial meeting in April 2002, the Director and staff have not met to try and address the grievances of the staff.
(b) The most senior members of staff have been largely sidelined. The way responsibilities are now assigned in the office has resulted in the major burden of the work being borne by the more junior members of staff.
(c) For the past two and a half years, one of the most experienced members of staff in the office has been withdrawn from prosecuting in the Circuit Courts. Despite several hearings at the level of the Public Service Commission on a challenge to the matters which have led to this action being taken, there has been no firm ruling and no indication if and when this withdrawal will end.
This withdrawal in a context where the office has only four members of staff with more than 10 years experience, and the establishment of the office being stretched to the limit with an ever increasing workload. This situation has put great strain on the other members of staff, who are prohibited from even requesting this senior prosecutor to assist as leading counsel in complex matters before the Circuit Courts.
INITIATIVE
(d) There is a lack of trust between the Director and staff. This has resulted in staff members being reluctant to exercise their initiative in the handling of matters.
(e) The huge workload, the inadequate staff establishment and the restrictions imposed on the assignment of the senior staff member have led to several staff members being assigned to court for much longer periods than desirable. This has had negative implications for the health of several persons and for the discharge of our other responsibilities.
(f) There is only one acting Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions, while the establishment provides for three Deputy Directors.
(g) Several staff members have either not been appointed or have had much more junior staff members promoted above them without any reasons being stated for such action. There are also some staff members who appear to be acting in posts not assigned to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
(h) The chain of command and grievance procedures are still unclear to the staff.
(i) Since January, this year, four competent and fairly experienced staff members have left the office as a direct consequence of the state of affairs. Another resignation is to take effect in July. If the situation is not meaningfully addressed, immediately, most of us who remain are awaiting the earliest opportunity to leave.
Paula Llewellyn, Acting Senior Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions, is the senior prosecutor withdrawn from prosecuting in the Circuit Courts. She has been described by her colleagues as a very competent and experienced prosecutor, whose integrity cannot be questioned.
The 22 of the 23 prosecutors who went on sick-out took issue with Mr. Pantry in regards to comments he made on a radio programme on Tuesday, the second day of the industrial action.
All 22 who affixed their signatures to another press release issued last Tuesday, said "the suggestion that 22 professionals have been 'hijacked' by one member of staff is unfortunate. We have all been adversely affected by the state of affairs and have all independently come to the decision to take this course of action in the interest of the administration of justice," they said in the press release.
They went on further to say, "we are united and we will not be swayed from our primary objective of doing all we can to improve our conditions of service so that we can better serve the administration of justice in Jamaica."
HIJACKING MYTH
But anybody who believes the ''hijacking' theory will certainly believe myths or obeah for that matter. If the prosecutors, who are all lawyers in their own rights, could be 'hijacked', then it would leave the public to wonder how these professionals, who must be clothed with integrity and competence two of the hallmarks of being a good prosecutor could be so easily influenced.
Well, good sense prevailed and on Wednesday, the third day of the sick-out, the Public Service Commission (PSC) decided to meet with the prosecutors' representatives. On Thursday, members of the PSC; Michael Hylton, Q.C., Solicitor-General, and Carol Palmer, Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Justice, met with the prosecutors' representatives and Mr. Pantry.
The prosecutors returned to work on Thursday and, after being briefed by their representatives on the outcome of the meeting, expressed satisfaction with the agreement reached.
A joint press release issued by the Services Commission and the DPP's office said the DPP and the staff representatives agreed on the primacy of the public interest and a commitment to preserve, defend and enhance the integrity of the justice system; to initiate a regime of open communication within a broadly consultative framework; to finalise the early appointment of an independent mediator to facilitate the team-building process; full and consistent exercise of professional respect on both sides; review allocation of work for coverage of duties in Circuit Courts; Public Service Commission will continue to exercise its constitutional role to monitor, encourage and guide the implementation of the new standards and culture; the implementation of the recommendations in the Muirhead Report to be done in a timely manner and in keeping with the provisions of the Constitution.
RECOMMENDATIONS
They were updated at the meeting on the actions taken so far in implementing the recommendations of the Muirhead Committee. It was also decided that recommendations for appointments to vacant posts in the DPP's office would be considered by the PSC at its meeting scheduled for July 17.
The Muirhead Committee was appointed by the PSC in November, last year, based on numerous complaints by the prosecutors. The Committee, which was chaired by David Muirhead, an eminent Queen's Counsel, presented the recommendations to the PSC in February. It is puzzling that it had to take an industrial action for the PSC to consider something as simple as the recommendations for appointments to vacant posts.
The powers-that-be seem to believe in crisis management and so the situation had to become a crisis before they acted. Is this what the authorities think of the administration of justice in this country? It is no wonder that the nation's courts are so devoid of many basic amenities. The sick-out could have been avoided if the Government had acted with expediency to implement even a few of the recommendations by the Muirhead Committee. This could certainly have prevented a shutdown of the courts, which left prisoners languishing in custody because their cases had to be set for other dates.
Well, now that the DPP and his staff have ironed out their grievances for now, it should be back to normal business in a harmonious environment to "preserve, defend and enhance the integrity of the justice system". Will it?
