The court system is in dire need for reforms that would bring it into the modern age, Chief Justice Richard Ground said yesterday.

In his first interview since assuming office in March, Mr. Justice Ground said the system suffered from structural, regulatory and “attitude” shortcomings.

But solutions do exist, he said, and are fairly straightforward.

Among his solutions are smaller juries, a new way of scheduling criminal cases and a stricter approach to handling cases.

“I think it's got real problems. We need to get it from the late 19th Century to the 21st Century, maybe get it to the end of the 20th Century. But it does have problems that need to be addressed.”

Asked to explain the “attitude” problems, Mr. Ground said “the whole court culture is geared to slowness ... and everyone needs to update their attitudes.”

Quoting from Lord Justice Auld, who wrote a report on the English justice system, he said while lawyers had a duty to fully represent their client, some would do well to remember that a criminal trial is not a game.

“That should be our guiding light, it shouldn't be a game. But all too often it degenerates into game playing and the present system not only tolerates that but it smiles upon it and encourages it.

“So we need a change in the culture and the judiciary can set the tone by adopting a tougher attitude,” he said.

Mr. Justice Ground said the key structural problem is the chronic backlog in criminal cases.

“The solution to that is to run at least one criminal court back to back and preferably two - because we've got two courts with jury boxes and jury rooms, and we're not using those full time at the moment.”

The system of assigning fixed dates for cases should be changed to a “warrant list” system where cases are put in a list and tried in order, he said.

Defendants will be warned to be ready to go to trial when they get near to the top of the list. If a judge agrees to put them further down the list, the next in line moves up.

“In that way we could literally set cases back to back - so that when one finishes we can start the next one. That's the only way I see of getting rid of the backlog.”

But he added that there would always be some exceptional cases which deserve a fixed date.

“If you've got a really big case coming up with lots of witnesses coming in, they could get a fixed date and be assigned a judge early on. So if there are any preliminary applications they would go to the trial judge before the case starts. But they would be the exception not the rule.”

He said the backlog problem was highlighted by the Andrew Hall case, where the accused drug smuggler walked free when a judge quashed the charges because he had been held for almost three years without trial.

Hall's indictment has since been reinstated by the Court of Appeal, but Hall himself has left the Island.

Mr. Justice Ground will preside over his first arraignment session today. He noted he will be setting trial dates for September through November.

“The available dates in-between are filled up. But the problem with having a fixed date system is if one of those bookings falls out... then your court time is wasted.”

The current system of having cases on standby, he said, doesn't work. The warrant list system will require a senior administrator to oversee it, however. “You want a senior administrator - someone like the Registrar but it shouldn't be the Registrar because she's got a vast number of other responsibilities.”

The administrator would ensure people were warned that their case is coming up and address any problems coming up. A judge would also be in charge of the list to hear applications when problems arise, the Chief Justice added.

Rules would be put in place to make sure that people apply to the judge for direction as soon as problems crop up and bar adjournments for problems that could have been foreseen earlier.

A defendant could, theoretically, under the proposed system go to trial without a lawyer.

“It would be the responsibility of the defendant to make sure that his own legal representation is in order, not the court's. So if he comes on the day and says “I don't know where my counsel is, I've not been able to afford counsel”, provided he's had long enough to do something about it, that should be greeted unsympathetically.”

Mr. Justice Ground pointed out that the current system can be defeated by not getting a lawyer or by changing lawyers regularly so that new lawyers on the case plead for an adjournment because they are not ready.

“That's not the lawyer's fault when that happens - it's the client's fault. The client needs to look far enough ahead knowing when his case is coming up and take steps. And if he's eligible for legal aid he needs to apply for legal aid in good time and not expect legal aid to go looking for him.”

But he stressed no one wants to see unrepresented defendants.

“It's a trial judge's nightmare to get unrepresented defendant because the judge has to make sure he understands the proceedings. Nobody wants to see it, but in the end it may be unavoidable.”