Durrant Pate/ Contributor

Positing the argument that a disinvestment in Jamaica’s court system is incentivising law breaking, Chief Justice Bryan Sykes made a case to Jamaica’s and by extension, the region’s financial and capital markets elites for more investment to continue the island’s economic growth and development.

Justice Sykes argues that this is due to the expected large backlog of cases, crumbling infrastructure, outdated machinery and technology from disinvestment in the court system, in particular, and the justice system by extension. 

He referenced studies showing a direct relationship between investments in a country’s court system and its economic development, citing one study that concluded that its costs amount to as much as 2.5% of a country’s gross domestic product (GDP) annually due to disinvestment in the justice system.

Addressing the Jamaica Stock Exchange (JSE) 21^st Regional Investments & Capital Market Conference last week, Justice Sykes zoomed in on the case of Italy, where he declared that one study, which looked at the time taken to resolve a dispute and the efficiency of court system, found that it takes on average 1,216 days to resolve case. This revelation drew deep contemplation from the capital elites, who gathered at the Jamaica Pegasus Hotel to hear the Chief Justice speak on the topic: Building Investor Confidence Through Judicial Efficiency.

Properly funded court system imperative

“An efficient court system should not just be the interest of the Chief Justice but everyone in this room. To attract investment and having an efficient court system is an imperative,” Justice Sykes declared, pointing to studies, which have concluded that, “high level of court system and efficiency have a significant impact on financial markets”. 

He cited the need for an efficient court system to avoid tying up large amounts of capital in disputes for prolonged periods and preventing their release until the case is completed.

The head of Jamaica’s judiciary went into great details indicating that these resources are unproductive being tied up in disputes rather than having that money circulating and building the local economy. Hence, the imperative is to have an efficient and well-financed court system. Chief Justice Sykes told the conference, “High crime doesn’t go well with investment and development, referencing the example of extortion, which he maintains doesn’t enhance economic development and growth.

“Look at households, which paint at Xmas, putting in new furniture now when you are in a high crime environment, it’s a disincentive for housing development when you could be driven out of the house…In that regard, efficiency and consistency of the courts is paramount,” the chief jurist advanced.

Hope for the future

However, all is not lost, as Justice Sykes pointed to certain positive developments highlighting the parish courts, where there has been a marked reduction in the time for disposing of cases moving from 24 months to 18 months. “All of this enables better planning for litigants, who may choose to utilize the courts,” the Chief Justice explained whilst calling for a changing the mind in how the Jamaican society think of the courts to see them as more of a service delivery institutions.

Drawing on Jamaica’s past, he made the point that the local court system has been a part of the island’s colonial past, where the courts were never devised to serve the population at large but it now being transformed as being here to serve all in society. He noted that a large percentage of hearings are going online to make people’s lives easier. The chief jurist called on the audience to join the judiciary in imploring the government to invest more resources over time to improve efficiency and the appearance of the court system, imploring the capital elites that, “expenditure of the court not just government expenditure; it’s an investment in the economy, an investment in growth”.

In responding to a question from the audience, Justice Sykes implored the society to think of other ways of resolving disputes than the court, suggesting mediation, which he argued is now being considered as viable option than the litigation model “because in the dispute some of the parties don’t want to end the business relationship and don’t want to have a feelings of a winner and loser”. He commented that “the litigation model helpful but mediation being seen these days as more viable”.