Criminal Justice (Amendment No 3) (Jersey) Law 201-

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made on 13 June 2014:

Decision Reference: MD-C-2014-0105
Decision Summary Title:	Lodging of the Draft Criminal Justice (Amendment No. 3) (Jersey) Law 201-		Date of Decision Summary:	13th June 2014
Decision Summary Author:	Project & Research Officer		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt?	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written		Person Giving Oral Report:	N/A
Written Report Title:	Criminal Justice (Amendment No. 3) (Jersey) Law 201-		Date of Written Report:	20th May 2014
Written Report Author:	Senior Legal Adviser		Written Report : Public or Exempt?	Public
Subject: Lodging of the Draft Criminal Justice (Amendment No. 3) (Jersey) Law 201-
Decision(s): The Chief Minister agreed to lodge ‘au Greffe’ the Draft Criminal Justice (Amendment No. 3) (Jersey) Law 201- for debate by the States at the earliest opportunity.
Reason(s) for Decision: The Legislation Advisory Panel has considered Article 4 of the Criminal Justice (Jersey) Law 1957 (the Law), which enables criminal courts in Jersey to allow time for the payment of fines. The court concerned may direct payments by instalments, and may fix a term of imprisonment if any sum is not duly paid or recovered. The Legislation Advisory Panel has recommended that the maximum sentence for non-payment of a fine should be linked to the maximum jurisdiction of the Magistrate to impose imprisonment, which would therefore become 12 months instead of 6 months. The Legislation Advisory Panel has also recommended that the Law is amended to remove the limit of 12 months applicable to terms of imprisonment for non-payment of a fine imposed by the Royal Court, having concluded that the length of the sentence for non-payment could properly be left to the discretion of the Royal Court. The order of the Royal Court by which the term of imprisonment is fixed is appealable, and so a person convicted is able to challenge the term fixed if he or she believes it to have been excessive.
Resource Implications: There are no financial or manpower implications arising from this decision.
Action required: The Greffier of the States to be requested to arrange to lodge ‘au Greffe’ the Draft Criminal Justice (Amendment No. 3) (Jersey) Law 201- for debate by the States at the earliest opportunity.
Signature:		Position: Deputy Chief Minister of Jersey
Date Signed:		Date of Decision:

Criminal Justice (Amendment No 3) (Jersey) Law 201-

Jersey Crest

Criminal Justice (Amendment No. 3) (Jersey) Law 201-

Report

This Projet de Loi seeks to amend the Criminal Justice (Jersey) Law 1957 (“the 1957 Law”).

The Legislation Advisory Panel has considered Article 4 of the 1957 Law which enables criminal courts in Jersey to allow time for the payment of fines.[1] The court concerned may direct payments by instalments, and may fix a term of imprisonment which the person liable to pay the fine is to undergo if any sum is not duly paid or recovered. Article 4 stipulates however that any such term of imprisonment may not exceed –

(a) 6 months in the Magistrate’s Court (or on appeal from the Magistrate);

(b) 12 months in any other case.

The ceiling is thought to be anomalous in each case for the following reasons:

The Magistrate’s Court

The Magistrate has jurisdiction to imprisonment offenders for up to 12 months. But this jurisdiction used to be limited to 6 months which is presumably why the maximum of 6 months was applied to sentences fixed under the 1957 Law. Logically, when the ordinary jurisdiction of the Magistrate was increased from 6 months to 12 months,[2] the period of 6 months referred to in Article 4 of the 1957 Law for sentences for non-payment of fines ought to have been increased to 12 months as well.

This draft Law would effect that change (by linking the maximum sentence for non-payment of a fine to the maximum jurisdiction of the Magistrate to impose imprisonment).

The Royal Court

The amount of a fine imposed by the Royal Court is potentially unlimited; but no matter how large the fine imposed, the sentence for non-payment of that fine cannot exceed 12 months. The Legislation Advisory Panel could see no reason why the hands of the Royal Court should be tied in this way, and concluded that the length of the sentence for non-payment could properly be left to the discretion of the Royal Court. Under the Court of Appeal (Jersey) Law 1961, a “sentence” includes any order made by the Royal Court when dealing with the person convicted, and it follows that the order of the Royal Court by which the term of imprisonment is fixed is appealable and that the person convicted is therefore able to challenge the term fixed if he or she believes it to have been excessive.

The draft Law would effect that change i.e. it would remove the limit of 12 months applicable to terms of imprisonment for non-payment of a fine imposed by the Royal Court.

Financial and manpower implications

There are no manpower or financial implications for the States of Jersey arising from this draft Law.

[1] The Article also applies to forfeited recognisances but for the sake of brevity this Report refers only to fines

[2] by the Magistrate’s Court (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment No. 8) (Jersey) Law 2000