KINGSTON, Jamaica — In a sharply worded address to Jamaica’s House of Representatives during the annual Sectoral Debate on June 3, opposition justice spokesperson Zuleika Jess has launched a scathing critique of the government’s treatment of the country’s Justices of the Peace (JPs), calling the complete absence of any form of financial or logistical support for the volunteer officials a clear case of institutional exploitation.
As a first-term Member of Parliament representing St Elizabeth North Eastern, Jess centered her remarks on what she frames as a fundamental inequity embedded in Jamaica’s community justice system. She pointed out that more than 7,000 active JPs across the island are required by law to provide their services strictly on a volunteer basis, and are legally prohibited from accepting any form of payment or gratuity for their work. Despite this volunteer status, Jess emphasized that the Jamaican state depends heavily on JPs to carry out core justice functions, ranging from processing bail applications and conducting out-of-court mediations to conducting regular inspections of police lock-up facilities.
What makes this arrangement indefensible, Jess argued, is that JPs are forced to cover all operational and work-related costs out of their own personal funds. From basic stationery, printer ink and office supplies to fuel and travel costs for trips to courts and prisons, even when serving as lay magistrates, JPs receive no reimbursement for these routine expenses. “This is not sustainable volunteerism; it is institutional exploitation,” Jess told parliamentary colleagues.
The opposition spokesperson also called out Justice Minister Delroy Chuck for his consistent rejection of all proposals to introduce even a modest stipend for JPs. Chuck has repeatedly defended the current model by framing the role as purely voluntary, but Jess countered that this stance ignores the growing financial barrier that uncompensated service creates. By requiring JPs to cover all their own costs, the current system effectively restricts the role to wealthy people who can afford to absorb these ongoing expenses as a form of charity. “True justice cannot run on charity alone,” Jess stressed, adding that the current administration is completely disconnected from modern global standards for justice volunteer work.
Drawing on international examples to back up her call for reform, Jess noted that clear and widely accepted precedent exists for providing financial support to volunteer JPs and magistrates around the world. In the United Kingdom, for instance, volunteer magistrates and JPs receive formal reimbursement for travel costs and a loss-of-earnings allowance to offset income they forfeit to carry out their justice duties. “They do not pay out-of-pocket to serve the Crown. The state actively reimburses them for the costs incurred while delivering justice,” Jess explained.
She further cited the United Nations Volunteers system, the world’s largest global volunteer network, which does not pay full salaries but provides a structured living allowance to cover volunteers’ basic expenses. This framework ensures that volunteer service is not a luxury reserved only for people with significant personal wealth, she said. Similar models are already in place in Australia and Canada, where JPs receive operational support, training stipends and travel subsidies to prevent them from facing personal financial penalties for carrying out official duties like notarizing documents or processing bail requests.
Jess emphasized that the opposition is not calling for full, generous salaries for JPs. Instead, she said the demand is for an enforceable, transparent expense stipend structured to align with international best practices. “It is time to treat Jamaica’s JPs with the global standard of dignity they deserve,” Jess said. She closed by questioning the government’s inconsistent approach: “We pay notaries public to notarise documents and judges to hear cases, why shouldn’t we offer our JPs a stipend to cover out of pocket expenses?”