The Jamaican government has abruptly suspended legislative proceedings on the contentious Jury (Amendment) Bill 2026 following substantive objections raised by Opposition Leader Mark Golding in the House of Representatives. Justice Minister Delroy Chuck announced the unexpected pause after acknowledging the validity of multiple constitutional and procedural concerns regarding the proposed amendments.
The legislative delay marks a significant development in Jamaica’s judicial reform process. Minister Chuck, who initially tabled the bill on January 13 with intentions to fast-track its approval, conceded that the opposition’s critique necessitated comprehensive reconsideration of several provisions.
Opposition Leader Golding, drawing upon his experience as former justice minister, identified multiple problematic areas within the proposed legislation. Chief among these was a clause mandating judges to consider specific factors—including disclosure status, witness availability, and party readiness—when confirming trial dates. Golding contended this provision fundamentally misaligned with the Jury Act’s purpose, noting its complete absence of jury-specific references.
‘This constitutes an inappropriate insertion into jury legislation,’ Golding asserted. ‘Trial readiness hearings belong within the Criminal Justice Administration Act or Civil Procedure Rules, not within legislation specifically governing jury trials.’
The opposition leader raised particular alarm regarding payment protocol amendments for civil jury trials. The proposed clause would require the party requesting jury trial to bear financial responsibility for juror compensation. Golding warned this could create perceived conflicts of interest, noting jurors might feel indebted to the financing party—potentially compromising judicial impartiality through what he characterized as a ‘whoever pays the piper calls the tune’ scenario.
Further objections targeted provisions addressing jury tampering. Golding highlighted an imbalance in the proposed measure that would grant prosecution—but not defense—the right to apply for trial without jury. This departure from existing law, which requires mutual consent for judge-only trials in non-capital cases, raised fundamental fairness concerns.
Additionally, Golding challenged an overly broad clause permitting judges to terminate trials and order retrials based solely on judicial determination of ‘interest of justice.’ He argued this required clearer parameters to prevent arbitrary application across Jamaica’s judicial system.
Minister Chuck’s decision to postpone further debate reflects the government’s recognition that the bill requires substantial refinement to address these constitutional, procedural, and ethical concerns before progressing through legislative channels.