Criminal offenses
Processing of criminal offences by the judicial system, 2013
A mission report by the judicial inspectorate of the Ministry of Justice provides extremely useful data on the situation in the country's various courts. At the time of writing this report, there were in the 18 jurisdictions of the country:
138 prosecutors (18 government commissioners and 120 deputy government commissioners);
101 persons performing the functions of investigating judges (13 investigating judges and 88 judges who are both sitting judges and investigating judges);
170 persons who perform the functions of sitting judges (18 deans, 64 judges and 88 judges who are both sitting and investigating judges);
158 employees of the public prosecutor's office (clerks and bailiffs);
189 court clerks ;
and more than 600 justices of the peace
An analysis of the distribution of these judicial resources shows that paralegals, investigating judges and trial judges are very unevenly distributed among the different jurisdictions. For example, the number of paralegals per 100,000 inhabitants varies from 4.19 in Anse-à-Veau to 0.83 in Jacmel, whereas the national average is 1.33. The number of examining magistrates per 100,000 inhabitants is also very unequal from one jurisdiction to another. For example, there are 3.8 in Coteaux and 2.7 in Miragoane, but only 0.2 in Gonaïves, whereas the national average is one investigating judge per 100,000 inhabitants. The number of judges per 100,000 inhabitants is also unequal from one jurisdiction to another. There are 6 in Coteaux and 0.6 in Gonaïves, while the national average is 1.6. In concrete terms, this means that jurisdictions with relatively small populations have greater resources than other jurisdictions with larger populations. These excessive disparities could be analysed in terms of the population's access to justice.
If the number of judicial personnel per 100,000 inhabitants can be an indicator of the population's ability to access justice, the distribution of judicial resources should also be analysed in terms of the reported crime rate in each jurisdiction. This information provides an indication of the real capacity of the judicial system to deal with criminal complaints that are brought to the attention of the judiciary by citizens.
The report of the Judicial Inspectorate of the Ministry of Justice made an inventory of the criminal complaints filed in the public prosecutor's offices of the 18 jurisdictions between October 2011 and June 2012. These complaints for crimes and misdemeanours are the basis for the workload of judicial staff in criminal matters. Some complaints will be closed by the prosecutors, while others will be the subject of requests for information, referral orders and court judgements.
Again, there are significant disparities between the different jurisdictions. For example, the number of prosecutors per 100 offences varies from 10.19 in Anse-à-Veau to 0.62 in Mirebalais. The number of investigating judges per 100 offences is also very uneven from one jurisdiction to another: 6.6 in Coteaux and 0.4 in Jacmel. The number of judges per 100 offences is also uneven from one jurisdiction to another, ranging from 5 in Anse-à-Veau to 0.6 in Jacmel. In practical terms, this means that jurisdictions with relatively low reported crime are better resourced than other jurisdictions with higher reported crime.
It is conceivable that jurisdictions with fewer resources will find it more difficult to respect the rights of victims and suspects to a trial within a reasonable time, and that these jurisdictions may experience particular problems in terms of prolonged pre-trial detention. The question is whether a better allocation of existing resources could improve overall productivity.
In some jurisdictions, the workload of prosecutors is seventeen times that of their colleagues in the least busy jurisdictions. For examining magistrates, the workload of some is twenty times that of others, while for judges in courts of first instance, the workload of some is twenty-five times that of others.
In our opinion, differences of this magnitude cannot be justified. While the courts of Anse-à-Veau and Coteaux have too many resources, the courts of Gonaïves, Jacmel, Mirebalais and Petit-Goave are terribly short of them.
In a context where empirical data is sorely lacking, it is to be welcomed that the Ministry of Justice has produced this substantial report. It now remains for decision-makers to take the decisions that the analysis of this data requires.
