Junior Minister for Trade and Economic Development Honourable Shereen Flax-Charles has called out the Office of the Deputy Governor for failing to provide proper public consultation on important pieces of legislation brought before the House of Assembly from their office.
At the time, Flax-Charles was contributing to debates on the Jury Act which she said needed more consultation.
“The Jury Act is a very important piece of legislation. It is important that persons are able to go into a court of law and be able to feel comfortable when they meet maybe an unfortunate circumstance, but that they feel comfortable that they will be given a fair trial. It is also very concerning to me that we are speaking about trials without juries but I think we are a crossroad here and we are debating this bill today without much public consultation and I am very concerned about that and I know that certain individuals may not be happy that I am saying this today, however, we’re debating to take something out of the bill”, she said.
Flax-Charles went on to explain that in her research on the history of the Jury Act, she was informed that there had previously been consultations on the bill as far back as 2009.
But despite her best efforts to request evidence of these consultations being held, she said she is yet to be furnished with such evidence.
“Most persons are not comfortable with the trial without a jury but here we are doing the same thing to the public. In discussions about this bill I have been told that there were public consultations in 2009, some 13 years ago… I have asked to be provided with information, I’ve asked for proof that these consultations were held, dates, venues and times… Every public meeting I make myself available and I simply do not remember public consultations on this bill and I’ve asked for proof and I’ve not received it”, she explained.
Flax-Charles argued whether or not the consultations were had, their findings may no longer be relevant to the vast number of eligible jurors who would have joined the jury pool since then.
She noted that she had knowledge of a single virtual consultation being held on the bill on October 3rd.
However, she said that knowledge came only a few hours ahead of the consultation and only because she received the Zoom link in a group chat, which led her to make a fair judgement that many other Virgin Islanders were robbed of the opportunity to participate in the said discussion.
The Territorial At Large Representative further said, what made things worse was an incident she observed where a question from a young man, possibly a newly eligible juror, was seemingly brushed off.
“What really made me realise that this bill was being rushed through without due consideration to the public was when a young man asked a question on the Zoom about what is bad character, what is the definition, and in my opinion he was basically brushed off. That young man in 2009 would have been about 7 years old so if there were public consultations held in 2009, 13 years ago, we can do the math”, she stated.
Flax-Charles further lamented that members of the House of Assembly are not immune from similar circumstances, as was the case with the Registrar of Interests Act.
Although stating that she was not wishing to cast blame, she admitted that responsibility for such matters lies in the hands of the Office of the Deputy Governor.
“I am not one to lay blame but I am asking that this not continue to put persons at a disadvantage because the Deputy Governor’s Office is responsible for putting this bill to the public and did not do so in a timely manner”, she said.
“We have to call a spade a spade”, Flax-Charles added.