We know what happens when justice is delayed

In any society that claims to uphold the rule of law, justice must be more than an ideal—it must be a lived reality. Yet the timely and fair administration of justice sometimes appears precarious, even as successive governments introduce reforms aimed at tackling the country’s court backlog and procedural inefficiencies.

There is no denying that the current administration has made noteworthy efforts to remedy the longstanding deficiencies of our legal system. Attorney General Dale Marshall, despite attracting his fair share of criticism—some warranted, some not—has presided over several policy shifts intended to overhaul the judicial process.

These include the introduction of plea-bargaining legislation, giving accused individuals the option of judge-only trials, the appointment of additional judges, and legislative amendments allowing the Chief Justice to issue sentencing guidelines. These reforms are commendable, but they have yet to translate into a justice system that functions with the urgency the public expects and deserves.

The problems are vast and deeply entrenched. Limited resources, outdated procedures, and insufficient support systems continue to plague the courts. While the criminal courts receive the lion’s share of public attention, the situation in the civil courts is just as troubling.

Attorneys have long decried the glacial pace at which judgments are delivered—sometimes taking a decade or more. Such unacceptable delays are not mere administrative hiccups; they erode public confidence and deny both victims and accused persons the fundamental right to timely justice.

Even with reforms in motion, the pace of change is sluggish, and the consequences are severe. These issues were brought into sharp focus by Justice Denys Barrow of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), who, in an address, emphasised that criticism of judicial inefficiencies is not only warranted but necessary.

The CCJ has on multiple occasions highlighted Barbados’ failings. In a notable case, it condemned a four-year delay by the Court of Appeal in delivering a judgment as “intolerable.” The CCJ has even had to grant special leave for appeals due to egregious delays in local proceedings.

But perhaps the most damning indictment of the delays of justice in Barbados came not from an international body, but from within our own judiciary.

In a landmark ruling, newly appointed High Court Judge Patrick Wells ordered the State to pay nearly $300 000 in damages to Micha Laron Chase, a man who had a murder charge hanging over his head for a staggering ten years before the case was dropped.

In his judgment, Justice Wells did not merely rule in favour of Chase; he delivered a searing rebuke to the legal representatives of the Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions, who suggested that a mere $25 000 would be appropriate compensation for the gross violation of Chase’s constitutional rights.

“Quite frankly,” Justice Wells stated, “such a paltry sum is a further indication of how little value the State persists in attributing to the significance of protecting and securing the constitutional rights of the citizen.”

He went on to criticise what he described as a lack of genuine, good-faith consideration in the State’s proposed remedy, insisting that the court expected logic, fairness, and reason in such matters.

Most strikingly, the judge reminded the government—and, by extension, the entire legal establishment—of its fundamental obligations: “The State does not have the luxury of sitting on its hands and gently pacing itself along the way for a whole decade when the life of a citizen is on hold . . . . The State must understand that charging someone criminally and having them wait for a trial for a decade is not a luxury that the Constitution permits.”

These are not the words of an activist or a critic on the sidelines—they are the stern warnings of a sitting judge who sees the harm being inflicted not only on individuals but on the very justice system.

Barbados must heed these warnings. Good intentions and incremental reforms are no longer enough. A justice system that takes years to resolve criminal and civil matters is not merely inefficient—it is unjust. Every delay diminishes faith in our institutions, deepens trauma for victims, and compounds the suffering of the accused, whether guilty or innocent.