Court of Appeal For Fiji?

'J'HE following letter appeared in the

“Solicitors’ Journal,” London, on July 5, 1947. It was written Toy Mr. C.

C. Chalmers, formerly a legal prac titioner in Suva, Fiji, now of Auck land, NZ. His brother, Mr. N. S.

Chalmers, has a law practice in Suva at the present time. Both are en deavouring to bring about the estab lishment of an ordinary Court of

Appeal for Fiji and the Western

Pacific. Their reasons for this are stated in the following letter : AS a former active member of the Bar of Fiji, and now of New Zealand, and as one born in Fiji, and having a special interest in the progress of that Colony, I desire to draw public attention, in England, to the continued lack of a Court of Appeal for Fiji and the Western Pacific At present the only right of appeal is to the Privy Council, which is of a very limited character, and so expensive as generally to be prohibitive. I think in a number of Colonies provision has now been made for a local Court of Appeal, with the retention of the Privy Council as the final appellate Court.

In the case of Western Samoa, under mandate to New Zealand, there has been for many years a right of appeal from the High Court to the Supreme Court of New Zealand. But Fiji and the Western Pacific are still unprovided for in this respect, and there is urgent need for an ordinary Court of Appeal. Especially is this so in the case of crimes, and, in particular, capital cases, committed by natives and Indians, of whom there are now over 200,000 in Fiji. They constitute nine-tenths of the population.

I will now show how Fiji’s judicial system operates as regards crimes by that section of the community. Apart from Magistrates’ Courts (of which there is a new. elaborate and unnecessary system of three grades'), there is the Supreme Court of Fiji, formerly consisting of a Chief Justice, and now of a Puisne Judge as well.

When an accused person is committed for trial by a Magistrate, he is then tried before either the Chief Justice, or the Puisne Judge, with the aid of what are called “assessors,” four in capital cases, and two in all other cases. The presiding judge may, for “special reasons, order trial before a jury of seven, but this rarely, if ever, happens. These assessors, moreover, are chosen bv the Chief Justice himself, according to their education and character, from the list of jurors; and they are invariably from the small Euro pean section of the Colony, because only persons who earn more than £l5O yearly and have a competent knowledge of Eng lish, can become jurors.

At the conclusion of the trial, the assessors state their opinion orally; but— and that is the extraordinary provision —the presiding judge is not bound to con form to the assessors’ opinions! In certain cases he has given a verdict contrary to their opinions. It is true to say, there fore, that a native or Indian, charged with, say, a capital offence, may be con victed by a judge alone. The prisoner s only remedy, if he wishes to appeal, is to petition the PC for special leave, and. in most instances, there is also a petition for leave to appeal as a pauper. There have been several of such Fiji appeals in recent years.

IF leave to appeal is granted, the appeal proper comes on later. As much as two years can elapse before an appeal is heard and meantime the prisoner is languishing in jail. The right of appeal

to the PC, however, is very limited, be ing available only if it is shown that, by a disregard of the forms of legal process or by some violation of the principles of natural justice, substantial or grave in justice has been done. This means that time and again the PC cannot deal with the appeal because it is not an ordinary court of criminal appeal, as it has fre quently stated; and the prisoner, in such cases, is without remedy.

With an ordinary Court of Appeal for

Fiji, a number of convictions in the past, I consider, would have been reversed, and, in still more, some heavy terms of imprisonment would have been reduced.

I have referred to most appellants appealing as paupers, as they are in fact.

But even a pauper appeal to the PC from Fiji frequently involves heavy expense, be cause solicitors in England, as regards cases from the Colonies, are not under an obligation to act, free of charge, in a pauper appeal. This sometimes prevents a pauper appealing.

It would be an easy matter to provide by legislation for a local Appeal Court system for Fiji and the Western Pacific.

At present the best solution appears to be to provide for an appeal to the Court of Appeal of New Zealand. Britain has recently made available large sums for economic development and expansion in Fiji, and the Pacific. I say without hesitation, however, that an improve ment in the judicial system, in the direction I have mentioned, is something which is of greater urgency and import ance.

I am, etc.,

C. C. Chalmers.

Auckland, NZ.

Inspector M. McLeod, formerly of the Fijian Constabulary has taken up the position of Inspector of Police in Western Samoa, which had been vacant since the death of Inspector A. L. Braisby, last year.

Places for 100 Tonkinese from Noumea and about 500 at Vila and Santo were reserved on the “Ville d’Amiens,” for re patriation to Indo-China. She was to call at the French Colonies on her way back to Marseilles from the Pacific.