Bail Part 3 – Station Bail
Bail Part 3 – Station Bail
We have all heard the age-old warning, “Don’t get arrested on a Friday, or you’ll be spending the weekend in custody.” However, prior to the Administration of Justice Indictable Proceedings Act Chapter 20 of 2011 (AJIPAA as amended), in some instances, it was possible for a person to get Station bail from a Justice of the Peace (JP) whereby they were released and ordered to return to Court on the next working day. With the implementation of AJIPAA, that position was thought to have changed.
WHAT IS STATION BAIL?
Station bail or ‘JP bail’, as it is colloquially called, is the procedure where someone can access bail after a charge but before the first court hearing. This is the measure used most times for certain offences where there is a reasonable expectation that it may be some time before the Accused person is able to face the Court. These include the weekends, long weekends and public holidays as well as Carnival. Station bail is normally accessed at the police station and given by a JP.
HOW DID THE INTERPRETATION OF AJIPA CHANGE ACCESS TO STATION BAIL?
In Section 10 of AJIPA, the Act removed the authority of Magistrates to grant bail for indictable matters (serious criminal matter) and transferred it to Masters/Registrars of the High Court. The law was meant to take indictable matters out of the Magistrates’ Courts and get rid of the old preliminary enquiry process.
Many believed that since Magistrates and Justices of the Peace (JPs) got their authority from the same law—the Summary Courts Act—then removing that power from Magistrates also meant JPs lost it too. As a result, JPs around the country came to believe that they no longer had the power to grant station bail for serious, indictable offences.
WHAT EFFECT DID THIS HAVE?
This caused an issue where persons who were arrested and could not have their documents filed in a timely manner, would not be brought before the Court that day. This resulted in persons spending more time than necessary in a cell where the conditions are known to be less than ideal. More importantly, it resulted in an infringement of the fundamental right to liberty and freedom, enshrined in the Constitution, as well as the right for an accused to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. This was a grave issue.
WHAT IS THE COMMON LAW POSITION?
As it turns out JPs have always been a fundamental part of the protections of our constitutional rights and freedoms under the common law. JPs, formerly known as keepers of the Peace, have always been the missing safeguard for constitutional protections in the time between charge and being brought before the Court. They had the power to grant bail, a role which made access to justice easier for the accused person who could not be brought before the court in a timely manner. The interpretation of AJIPAA, held to be erroneous, removed that power, leaving a vacuum and causing persons to be in custody longer.
WAS THIS FIXED? CAN AN ACCUSED GET STATION BAIL NOW?
Yes. It was recently determined by the High Court that the AJIPAA legislation did not expressly remove this power to grant bail for an indictable offence. There is an important legal principle that the Courts should be slow to interpret law in a way that it repeals other laws by implication. In the case of Joel Alexander v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago CV2024-03115, decided by the Honourable Madame Justice Carol Gobin, the High Court reviewed the decision of a JP who refused to grant bail on the basis that JPs no longer had the authority to grant bail in light of AJIPAA. Justice Gobin the stated, that even though AJIPAA removed the Magistrates’ power to grant bail for indictable matters, it did not take that power away from the JP.
The belief was that JPs and Magistrates were conferred similar jurisdiction with respect of bail under the Summary Courts Act, however, upon exploration of the law, it was clear that while they had similar jurisdiction with respect to the legislation, JPs also had their own powers under Common Law, in a different jurisdiction to Magistrates, namely that period of time after charge and before being brought before the Court.
Historically JPs were used in the common law as an essential part of the protection of the rights relative to freedom and liberty enshrined in the Constitution. These essential rights are a big part of our society and should be protected, unless expressly curtailed for a specific reason through due process.
CONCLUSION
These keepers of the Peace, JPs continue to bridge the gap and ensure access to bail and by extension, work seamlessly as a safeguard for our fundamental constitutional right to freedom and liberty. This recent ruling reaffirms the long-standing role of Justices of the Peace in protecting citizens’ right to liberty. It also clarifies that the AJIPAA did not strip JPs of their authority to grant bail for serious charges.
Submitted by:
Chimere Gibson-Wadi
Public Defender II Junior
Public Defenders’ Department
Legal Aid and Advisory Authority,
23 Stanmore Avenue, Port of Spain.
Contact: 638-5222
Email: [email protected]
Website: laaa.org.tt