More than 150 inmates at Dodds Prison are trapped in legal limbo, waiting months – and in some cases, years – for decisions on their appeals, prompting furious complaints to the judiciary regarding what they call blatant breaches of constitutional rights.
According to “unofficial” data compiled by inmates and obtained by the Sunday Sun, 153 of them are awaiting decisions from the Court of Appeal or for their matters to be listed before it. Of that number, 39 have been waiting for more than a year simply to have their appeals resolved.
The most egregious example of the backlog is the case of former inmate Jason Marshall. Convicted of manslaughter and robbery in 2012, he has already served his entire prison sentence. However, despite his appeals being heard in 2018 and 2019, he has spent the past eight years waiting for a ruling.
Technically, though Marshall has served his time, he remains legally tied to the justice system without a final resolution on his convictions.
The startling figures were shared by a concerned relative of one of the inmates, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. He revealed that the frustrated prisoners banded together to collate the data and are drafting a formal letter of complaint to the judicial authorities.
The relative described the prolonged wait times as “unacceptable and a clear breach of their constitutional rights”.
“The length of time appellants are being made to wait is a travesty. Currently, there are inmates on hold for 18 months and counting, just awaiting a decision. Jason Marshall is a prime example of the extraordinary delays appellants are subjected to. He completed his entire sentence prior to his appeals even being heard, and eight years later, still no decisions have been delivered.”
The relative pointed out that under Section 18 (1) of the Constitution, an appellant who is challenging a conviction technically carries an “on trial” status regarding the finality of his or her guilt.
Legal observers note that the constitutional guarantee of a fair hearing “within a reasonable time” by an independent and impartial court applies not just to the initial trial, but extends to the appellate process as part of the broader protection of the law.
“If these rights are disregarded, the integrity of the judicial process is undermined and public confidence in the legal system is eroded,” the relative noted, echoing the legal sentiment.
Veteran criminal defence attorney, Senior Counsel Andrew Pilgrim, who has long championed the need for swift justice, told the Sunday Sun the system relies far too heavily on hope rather than structural safeguards – particularly for unrepresented inmates.
“My impression is that if you are not represented, it is very difficult to ensure that your appeal is heard swiftly,” he said. “You are relying, as a prisoner in Dodds, to communicate your appeal to the court and then you have no way of following up. Sometimes there is no legal aid provided, so a person is just hoping that the system is going to work.”
Pilgrim said that legislative and procedural structures must be implemented to enforce timelines, pointing out that the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) has already established clear guidelines.
“The CCJ has set down guidelines for how long these different aspects of procedure should take, but it is very difficult to effect that if you are sitting up in a cell in Dodds,” he added.
The CCJ has previously criticised Barbados for chronic delays within its judicial system. According to regional jurisprudence, if a judge delivers a decision in under six months, an applicant bears a heavy burden to prove unfair delay. However, once a judgment takes longer than six months, the delay is considered a prima facie (at first sight) breach of the right to a fair hearing, shifting the burden to the State to justify the hold-up.
The Sunday Sun reached out to the office of the Chief Justice for comment on the inmates’ complaints and the specific case of Jason Marshall. A court official responded that the queries had been sent to the “appropriate authority” for a response.