Title of Report: Court Review
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL CONFIDENTIAL Title of Report: Court Review Paper No: 164/13 Date: July 2013 Report of: Director of Central Services 1.0 Purpose 1.1 To allow Executive Council to consider the recommendations of the independent review of the Falkland Islands court system undertaken at our request by HM Courts & Tribunals Service of the Ministry of Justice. 2.0 Recommendations a) Approval of the recommendations of the independent review of the Falkland Islands court system undertaken by HM Courts & Tribunals Service of the Ministry of Justice, as set out in Appendix 1. 3.0 Summary of Financial Implication 2013/14 Full Year (£) (£) Capital 90,000 £nil Operating Budget 137,000 47,000 Total 227,000 47,000 Financial implications are indicative only and no funding is being sought at present. All projects with a financial implication will require further approval through Executive Council or Standing Finance Committee (depending on the matter) at the point in which a defined policy has been prepared. 4.0 Background 4.1 In June 2013 Executive Council received a report from the Chief Executive recommending the appointment of a Head of Courts and Tribunals Service to progress the implementation of the recent independent review of the Falkland Islands court system (paper 149/13 refers); Members approved the recommendation and recruitment to the post has now begun. 1 4.2 The review report contains a total of 26 recommendations, to be implemented over a timescale of between 6 and 18 months. Again, if these ambitious timescales are to be met, and given it is envisaged the appointment process for the Head of Courts & Tribunals Service will take some months, it is important that work starts as soon as possible on implementation. This paper therefore introduces the recommendations of the review, and following consultation with the Chief Executive, MLA Dick Sawle (portfolio holder), the Senior Magistrate, Attorney General and local law firms, makes recommendations over their implementation and timescales. 5.0 The Recommendations 5.1 The 26 recommendations (of which there are only 25), are set out in full in Appendix 1, along with proposed responses, and comments, costs and revised timescales for their implementation. In general, there is a lot to like about this review and the findings it has identified, so for the most part, it is proposed the recommendations are accepted. 6.0 Financial Implications 6.1 The financial implications associated with the recommendations of this report have been estimated at this stage to be as follows: Ite Section Type of Estimated 2014/15 Cost Cost onwards 2013/14 5 Training & support to the Judiciary Operating £30,000 - 7 Virtual court Operating £10,000 - 11 Part time Usher Operating £11,000 £11,000 12 Internet reference system (licences) Operating £10,000 £10,000 13 Secure electronic filing system Capital £40,000 - 13 Foreign language translations Operating £5,000 £5,000 17 Government trainees Operating £21,000 £21,000 22 Effective court facilities Capital £50,000 - 25 Justice Improvement group Operating £50,000 - Total £227,000 £47,000 Operating £90,000 - Capital £137,000 £47,000 Total £227,000 £47,000 Financial implications are indicative only and no funding is being sought at present. All projects with a financial implication will require further approval through Executive Council or Standing Finance Committee (depending on the matter) at the point in which a defined policy has been prepared. 6.2 Recommendation 23 regarding a new building would have significant cost implications and therefore will require a further more detail view and separate approval before this can be considered to go ahead. 2 7.0 Legal Implications 7.1 The recommendations taken as a whole, if implemented represent a fundamental shift in the way that the Court will operate in the Falkland Islands. The detail of many of the recommendations will need further thought before any planned changes are brought in. Many of the recommendations if accepted and implemented will require change to existing practice and procedure. Some recommendations will require amendment to legislation. As the detail implementation of the recommendations is taken forward, these issues will have to be addressed as part of that process 8.0 Human Resources Implications 8.1 Whilst it is too early to determine exactly what additional resources will be required if the items which are proposed for acceptance are agreed to, it is likely that some level of addition staffing (be it casual or permanent) will be required in both the short and longer term to deliver the objectives effectively. 3 APPENDIX 1 Role of the Judiciary Definition Accept / Cost Comment Lead Timeframe Reject Estimate proposed 1 The creation of a framework document between the Accept Staff time The example proposed is not HoCS Within 6 months Governor, Chief Justice and the Executive on a - Within regarded as fit for purpose of arrival of partnership between them in relation to the effective existing for the Falkland Islands and HoCS governance, financing and operation of the Court and budget will need to be developed. Tribunal Service in the Falkland Islands. This should approval also cover, inter alia, roles, responsibilities, independence, provision of infrastructure and resources, relationship with other bodies, accountability to the legislature and Executive, performance, reports, audit and inspection and a review provision. 2 The exploration of alternative models to provide Accept Staff time To be advertised in HoCS Within 6 months additional judicial support, including a list of judges - Within appropriate UK journals and of arrival of who specialise in family and children’s issues who existing within the MOJ system. HoCS could be drawn on as required. budget approval 3 The creation of a code of conduct and disciplinary Accept Staff time HoCS/ Within 6 months procedure for the judiciary which draws on support - Within SM of arrival of and best practice from the UK, other OTs and the existing HoCS CDs. budget approval 4 A code of conduct should also be developed for those Accept Staff time HoCS/ Within 6 months 4 who prosecute and defend in the court. - Within AG/ SM of arrival of existing / Local HoCS budget Law approval Co’s 5 The codifying of the appointment, training and system Accept Some of this already exists, HoCS Within 12 months for JPs and Judges, to include: and other parts (e.g. d) may of arrival a. advice on the appointment process from the £30,000 be a challenge locally, but in Ministry of Justice and on training and (one off) principle agreed. management from the Judicial College. Support should also be provided for the judiciary to network with judges from similar jurisdictions (other OTs, CDs and Commonwealth countries); b. the publication of an agreed appointment process for JPs and the judiciary; c. a mentoring scheme for new JPs; d. performance of the JPs should be monitored with a minimum number of sittings per annum; and e. A budget for judicial training which should lie with the court service, but should be supported by a framework to assist in identifying appropriate training for all members of the judiciary within the Islands. 5 Structures within the Court Definition Accept / Cost Comment Lead Timeframe Reject Estimate proposed 6 That the Head of Service (see section III) working Accept Staff time HoCS Within 12 months with the Senior Magistrate, draft a contingency plan - Within of arrival. and a business continuity plan for the court service to existing enable them to be able to deal with major events and budget to ensure that day-to-day work is not compromised or approval delayed in the event of a major trial. 7 That the court structure is developed, so that: Accept Staff time Agreed in principle, but it is HoCS Within 36 months a. There is a true summary court utilising the - Within felt that the 18 month of arrival. skills and commitment of local people while existing timeframe proposed is providing an appellate route to the Senior budget unrealistic and that some of Magistrate; approval these areas already exist. b. Different jurisdictions are created within the court structure so as to provide a youth court Suggested the HoCS bring and a family court, with the JPs court forming forward further proposals part of these jurisdictions at first instance; about implementation once c. There can be an increase in specialist civil and in post. commercial court sittings (although we note that civil claims are mainly small claims and Different ‘jurisdictions’ commercial matters are presently dealt with by already exist within the the Supreme Court). We recognise that these Court structure. different jurisdictions may involve the same people sitting in the same venue at different Parallel sittings of summary times of day but specialism, in so far as it is and magistrate’s courts possible, is to be commended; happen now. d. There can be parallel sittings of summary and 6 magistrate’s courts in the meantime using the Community justice specialist current office of the Senior Magistrate; courts would require more e. Building on the strengths of the Islands, sentences and resources. community justice specialist problem solving courts be developed specifically directed at Legislation will be required alcohol abuse, mental health and domestic for the HoCS to make repeat violence. These could tap into the voluntary orders in this way. organisations that appear to be a strength as well as the statutory agencies; The Senior Magistrate is now f. The summary court deals with licensing issues; able to sit off-Islands. g. The Head of Court Services can make uncontested or repeat orders such as Interim Care Orders; h. The Senior Magistrate is able to sit off-Island; i. The exploration of creating a virtual court in specialist fields so that judicial support can be brought in by video link; and j.