Government plans to establish two gun courts are facing scrutiny from two attorneys, who welcome efforts to clear a growing firearms-case backlog but question whether the measure will tackle the roots of gun crime.
With expectations that the courts will be established during the new legal year, which is set to commence in September, Attorney-at-law Sian Lange said she welcomed the courts’ potential to help clear the growing backlog of firearm cases but warned against allowing them to become a permanent fixture or a source of stigma.
“Boston, Philadelphia, New York, these are some of the jurisdictions that have similar gun courts in their legal systems,” Lange said.
She noted, however, that those jurisdictions were also associated with gun crime and stigmas surrounding young Black people.
“It’s against this backdrop that I am hopeful that the gun courts are used to reduce the ever-growing backlog of criminal matters, but also that we remain mindful that we would not want something like a gun court to become a status symbol or to become something that creates unwanted stigmas amongst ourselves.”
Lange said firearm offences had become “an acute problem” in Barbados in recent years and agreed that government needed strategies specifically aimed at curbing their proliferation.
But she argued that greater attention should be paid to the illegal importation of firearms.
“I also remain hopeful that serious efforts are being made to address the real issue, which is the illegal importation of these firearms at a higher level,” she said.
Lange added the gun courts should be viewed as a temporary response rather than a new standard in the justice system. “We don’t want the gun court to become the new standard by which we measure who is a bad man, but we do need some sort of temporary measure to address the backlog of firearm offences.”
The attorney suggested that the government consider specialised courts for other issues that had already become endemic or were on the brink of becoming so. “That is why I hope that the gun courts are intended to address the backlog rather than become a permanent fixture in our judicial system.”
Introducing the legislation in June, Minister of Legal Affairs and Criminal Justice Michael Lashley said the initiative was aimed at speeding up trials and tackling the backlog.
He said one court would deal with new firearm cases filed since January, while the other would focus on older cases in the backlog.
But attorney Simon Clarke believes the government is taking the wrong approach.
“The creation of two gun courts is a knee-jerk reaction to solving gun related crimes in Barbados, crimes that are addressed by the seven already established High Courts,” Clarke said.
He questioned what the specialised courts would achieve when Barbados already faced shortages of the necessary staff and defence attorneys.
Clarke warned that the additional courts could simply shift delays from one area of the judicial system to another, potentially worsening the overall criminal backlog.
He also argued that cases were already being delayed by incomplete police investigations and the need for forensic analysis.
“I suggest that instead of establishing gun courts, the unwavering focus should be on improving the quality and speed of investigations.”
He called for investment in modern forensic technology, including the Integrated Ballistic Identification System, which he said could help police link firearms to multiple crime scenes, identify suspects and criminal patterns, build stronger cases and produce files more quickly.
(JB)
The post Lawyers question gun courts plan appeared first on Barbados Today.
