Veteran JP says, JPs in dire need of proper training

Senior Justice of the Peace Abrahim Ali. - Photo courtesy Facebook

JUSTICES of the Peace (JPs) are now being tasked with carrying out deeper judicial functions without proper training, oversight or modern systems in place, veteran JP Abrahim Ali says.

The PRO for the Justices of the Peace Association (JOPATT) spoke with Newsday on November 15, a day after the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) (Amendment) Bill, 2025 (AJIPA) was passed in the Senate, and which once assented to by the President, will become law and legally give wider powers to JPs.

Ali complained that long-overlooked weaknesses in the JP system, particularly the lack of standardised training, record-keeping and consultation, despite successive governments relying on JPs for key functions in the criminal justice process. Ali said he found the core problem was structural.

“One must understand how JPs were appointed. JPs were basically politically appointed and never obtained training,” he said. “They were expected to perform an important judicial function (but) without any formal training.”

Ali said JOPATT has been trying to fill gaps by offering voluntary training but could never substitute for a mandatory national framework.

The AJIPA amendments restore and expand powers historically held by JPs, including authority to grant search warrants and issue station bail for indictable offences.

Those powers exist at common law, but confusion arose after earlier legislation and was later clarified by Justice Carol Gobin, who ruled that Parliament had never expressly removed a JP’s authority to grant station bail.

The proposed expansion of JP authority for search warrants became one of the most contested points in the debate.

Independent Senators Sophia Chote, SC, and Dr Desiree Murray warned that without immediate reforms, JPs could be thrust into roles requiring legal expertise and accountability mechanisms that do not presently exist.

Chote said the breadth of search powers under Section 5 was “draconian,” while Murray argued the lack of qualifications and oversight could “dilute judicial oversight and risk the arbitrary exercise of power.”

Concerns were also raised about data-seizure powers, which Attorney General John Jeremie said remains governed by the Data Protection Act. The government added a proclamation clause to delay the start of the search-warrant provisions.

AG John Jeremie told the Senate he would not proclaim that section until training and further reforms were addressed. He also pledged to refer the broader issue of JP standards to the Law Review Committee.

Ali supported the decision, saying the issues raised had long been known within the JP community. He said earlier legislative and administrative changes limited JPs’ involvement in warrant applications, and AJIPA represented an attempt to clarify that position.

“A warrant must never be issued without the proper procedures and guidelines laid down by the court,” he said.

“Rubber-stamping must never be the way any JP should operate.”

Acting president of the Police Social and Welfare Association ASP Ishmael Pitt said the association views the restoration of JP warrant-issuing powers favourably, primarily through the lens of policing needs. He welcomed the expanded access to judicial officers, saying that in urgent situations investigators must be able to secure warrants quickly.

Pitt said, “We really welcome the fact that JPs can now be used in order to get search warrants,” adding that limiting the pool of available judicial officers had previously “caused some issues in terms of managing crime.”

He added, however, that the system will only work if JP competence matches the gravity of the task.

Ali – a JP for 35 years – told Newsday the JP system still lacks consistent engagement from the judiciary and the Office of the DPP, leaving JPs without guidance as their responsibilities expand.