Bailiff criticised for ‘undermining findings of abuse inquiry’

Monday 21 August 2017

It’s claimed the Bailiff, Sir William Bailhache, is unduly using his influence in an attempt to stop the States introducing one of the key recommendations of the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry.

Next month the States Assembly is being asked to approve – as suggested by the Inquiry - a separation of powers – an end to the Bailiff being both the island’s chief judge and “speaker” of the States.

But, in a letter to Senator Ian Gorst and the Council of Ministers - excerpts of which are included in a proposition which is expected to be lodged by the Privileges and Procedures Committee later today - the Bailiff explains why he believes it would be a bad idea to split his job in two.

He describes the Inquiry’s recommendation 7 as ‘illogical and unnecessary’. And concludes by writing: “I should be grateful for your assurance that you will not take the line that the Care Inquiry’s Recommendation 7 is a reason for supporting the proposition of Deputy Tadier, or indeed for re-visiting the issue of the Bailiff’s role generally.”

One of the committee’s members, Deputy Sam Mézec, says the Bailiff’s intervention is totally unwarranted and goes to underline why the role should be split. He claims it shows that, despite the Bailiff claiming to be apolitical, he is playing an active role in politics.

Deputy Mézec says: “The Speaker of a Parliament is meant to be politically impartial and it is totally inappropriate for an unelected judge to attempt to influence how an elected Chief Minister argues for the implementation of his political policies. The Chief Minister is perfectly entitled to choose to act upon the recommendations of a £23m inquiry, and it is not the place of a Speaker to try to influence him one way or another.

“I find it astounding that the Bailiff thought it was appropriate to write to the Chief Minister to politically lobby him on how to conduct himself in the upcoming debate next month. He is entitled to his opinion, but we have had first the Clothier Report, then the Carswell Report and now the IJCI Report, and they have all made clear cases for the dual role of the Bailiff to end, and he is not entitled to attempt to influence the Chief Minister to disregard particular evidence just because he finds it inconvenient. Rather than being an advocate for progressive change, the Bailiff is instead choosing to epitomise the Jersey Way by using his position to try to block progress.”

A States spokesperson said that Chief Minister Senator Ian Gorst will respond to the Bailiff's letter in due course, but will not be commenting publicly in the meantime.