There continues to be robust debate within the legal fraternity over the issue of public comments being made by attorneys about cases before the court and the opposition to this activity.
A member of the General Legal Council, which issued a public statement on the matter on Tuesday, has sought to give clarity on its concerns about the situation. The matter was ignited this week following the publication of a letter written by former President of the Court of Appeal, Seymour Panton. Mr Panton expressed concern about the dangers of attorneys making certain comments which could influence juries or judges.
The General Legal Council issued a release expressing similar sentiments, and the Jamaican Bar Association also issued a statement urging caution. However, there has been disagreement with this stance, as some Attorneys, such as Bert Samuels, have stated that nothing is wrong with providing commentary on what was argued in court, or summarising submissions to the media.
Former Chairman of the General Legal Council, Michael Hylton, has sought to give some clarity to the issue. He explains that there is not a bar on Attorneys speaking about cases. However, the concern is about the language they use and whether their criticism goes too far. He noted when there is no balance and the criticisms get personal, it runs the risk of crossing the line.
Meanwhile, Bert Samuels has given his opinion on the sub-judice rule, which prohibits commentary on ongoing cases which could cause prejudice, bias or influence on the jurors or others involved.
He argues that times have changed and the rules are archaic. The sub-judice rule he argues is court governed and not GLC governed.
All feeds
