I note a rather interesting editorial in the Kaieteur News on June 7, 2011, touching on “An old court system in modern times”. I agree that we have an old court system. It is a national shame and disgrace that 170-odd cases are listed before two judges at the current criminal sessions when all and sundry know that it is an impossibility for even six cases to be disposed of when we take into account the performance of our court personnel. The April session had 194 cases and only five were completed.
To cover it off we see a virtual mockery when able-bodied policemen spend time to march the streets to ‘open the sessions’ four times per year. When this happens Central Georgetown comes to a standstill for about one hour when all streets leading to the court are blocked off. And to boot, the courts after this ceremonial opening will not sit until the following day.
Mr. Editor, can you or your reporters go to the High Court anytime after 09:30 – 10:00hrs  and see the court building like a ghost town? Only about two or three courts are functioning. The judges delight in granting adjournments at the drop of a hat. The judges do not accept their duties with dedication. Some waltz to court at 09:30hrs and no one cares to discipline them. If you want to see the court in operation just go through the Charlotte Street entrance. In the corridor you will see the judges, and some will be smoking away and telling those who care to listen what will happen to the ‘next case’ he will deal with. In fact, justice is not a cloistered virtue.
The time has long passed, but then, time is current and we can still adopt the practice to hold one session per year, which however, lasts 11 months. The current four sessions do not add up to sittings for more than four – five months in the criminal courts. There is no question of judges ploughing through tonnes of law reports. Apart from the Chancellor and the Court of Appeal, do we get any exposition from the judges in the High Court of the matters before them? Writing legal judgements and defining the law are alien concepts as far as our judiciary is concerned. The Chief Justice should make regular pronouncements to the public and let us know how many matters are pending for decision and who are the defaulting judges. We need a wake-up call. It is common knowledge that even when litigants consent to judgments before him, this certain judge puts off the case to consider what may be the consideration for such a move.
The availability of computers for judges to take notes is no excuse. For scores of years judges have been taking notes by hand and have been dealing very expeditiously with matters before them. Not trying to be facetious, but go to any store, department or wherever computers are in place and you are stuck. Try to make a payment at an office with computers and see the hassle one gets. If a good old receipt book is used you save three quarters of the time. See the recent frustration to buy a simple motor vehicle licence where the system is computerised.
Schools should be held for the judges for them to understand their oath of office. And the time book should be introduced to mark the hours of work per day a judge puts in. In every other country judges are required to sign the time book – it is a part of the judicial ethics. It is time for us to follow suit.