In a charged parliamentary address Monday, Antigua and Barbuda Prime Minister Gaston Browne delivered broad criticism of criminal defense attorneys and members of the national judiciary, tying his claims directly to a sweeping new legislative push to clamp down on firearm-related crime through harsher, mandatory minimum sentencing.
Speaking during ongoing debate in the House of Representatives over the Firearms (Amendment) Bill 2026, Browne opened his remarks by repeating long-held complaints that the region’s sentencing framework has grown far too lenient for violent and repeat offenders, arguing that lax punishment is putting public safety at risk. He claimed that too many defense attorneys prioritize the interests of their accused clients and their own financial gain over community safety, opening a broader rebuke of the legal profession.
The prime minister referenced an uncorroborated complaint he said was brought to his attention by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), alleging that a single unnamed defense attorney had attempted to undermine ongoing prosecutorial work. He offered no identifying information about the attorney, no concrete context for the alleged conduct, and confirmed that no charges or convictions have been filed against the individual. Browne added he had instructed the DPP to pursue disciplinary or legal action if the attorney engages in similar behavior again.
Expanding his criticism to attorneys who have publicly pushed back against his past attacks on the judiciary, Browne claimed without evidence that a number of these critics are themselves engaged in corrupt practice. He argued that many defense attorneys support lenient sentencing simply because it benefits the clients they represent, a position that he says puts private interest ahead of public good.
Browne’s criticism of lenient sentencing is not new. In recent weeks, he has repeatedly argued that short custodial sentences for serious violent and repeat offenses are driving a cycle of crime across the region. Just last week, he went public with claims that the Caribbean judiciary has settled into what he called a “lenient sentencing orthodoxy” that erodes public safety. Back in August, he requested the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court’s chief justice launch an independent review of sentencing practices for firearm offenses, violent crime, and repeat offending, with a scope that also includes examination of charging practices, prosecution protocols, bail policies, remand procedures, and rehabilitation programs.
On Monday, he extended his critical remarks directly to the judiciary, while attempting to preempt accusations of threatening judicial independence. “I respect judicial independence and do not want conflict among the branches of government,” Browne told lawmakers, “but judicial independence should not prevent Parliament from legislating tougher sentences.”
He explained that the core goal of the 2026 amendment bill is to deliberately curtail judicial sentencing discretion, a power the government says has been repeatedly abused to hand down overly lenient punishments across the Caribbean. “We do accept that to ensure justice, that they must have some discretion,” Browne said, “but Parliament has come specifically to curb that discretion” because of persistent abuse.
The prime minister emphasized that the executive, legislative and judicial branches hold separate constitutional mandates, but all share a core common objective: protecting public safety. He pushed back against what he described as unreasonably short sentences for serious firearm offenses, calling out 10-month, one-year, and two-year sentences that conflict with what lawmakers have repeatedly signaled is the intended severity of punishment for these crimes. The new legislation is designed to codify Parliament’s expectation for harsher punishment in clear, binding terms.
Under the proposed reforms, specified firearm offenses will carry mandatory minimum sentences of five years when heard in Magistrates’ Court and 15 years when heard in the High Court, while the maximum penalty for some offenses will be raised to 30 years. The bill does carve out a narrow exception for exceptional circumstances, where judges may deviate from the statutory minimum if imposing that minimum would be manifestly unjust, unreasonable, or excessive. Any judge who uses this exception would be required to formally document and certify their reasoning for departing from the mandatory minimum, a transparency measure Browne says adds accountability to the process.
The prime minister stressed that the government is not seeking to impose disproportionate punishments, but rather to correct what he frames as the far greater problem of disproportionately lenient sentences that fail to protect the public. “This intervention is necessary to protect the public and reduce repeat offending,” he said of the mandatory minimum framework.
In addition to the sentencing reforms, the Browne administration has already taken steps to strengthen prosecutorial capacity. Cabinet has previously approved the recruitment of up to five new attorneys to join the DPP’s prosecution team, alongside funding for specialized prosecutor training and scholarships for two sitting police officers to complete legal studies before joining the DPP’s office.
Debate on the Firearms (Amendment) Bill 2026 remains ongoing in the House of Representatives, with no final vote scheduled as of Monday’s proceedings.