Wednesday 27 January 2021
Select a region

Minister and Bailiff clash over abuse inquiry criticism

Minister and Bailiff clash over abuse inquiry criticism

Wednesday 09 October 2019

Minister and Bailiff clash over abuse inquiry criticism

The Bailiff has clashed with the Children's Minister after he used his final speech in the States Chamber to hit out at an inquiry into child abuse in Jersey, which recommended splitting his dual role.

In his final moments presiding over the States Assembly before he retires next week, Sir William Bailhache took the opportunity to criticise a finding of the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry that the dual role of the Bailiff as President of the States and Chief Judge should be separated in the interest of combatting what it termed as the ‘Jersey Way'.

His comments come as questions continue to be raised over whether having the island’s Head Judge as the presiding officer causes problems in terms of impartiality.

Although he “would really have preferred to avoid controversy”, Sir William said he felt it was his “duty to defend” the office of Bailiff from what he termed as “unfair criticism” from the Care Inquiry both in 2017 and at their review last month.


Pictured: The Bailiff took the opportunity to criticise the Care Inquiry's finding that his role should be separated.

In his statement to States Members, Sir William took issue with how the Inquiry had equated the fact that the Bailiff sits both as the Chief Justice – presiding over the Courts as the Head Judge – and as the presiding officer of the States – where legislation is made – with what it termed as ‘the Jersey Way'.

“There is an assumption by the Panel that the perceived lack of separation between the judicial and legislative or executive powers - in other words the office of the Bailiff - is part of this alleged culture of cover-up, unfair decision taking and decision-making in secret." 

He also slammed the Panel as having “merely arrived in the island with what looks very much like preconceived notions and prejudices as to what a proper constitution should look like".

"It accepted unquestioningly the complaints of the present system often expressed by those who had no real knowledge of how it worked," he said.

Sir William said that the Inquiry Chairman, Frances Oldham QC, is too experienced to have made this connection between the Bailiff’s role and ‘the Jersey Way’ unintentionally.


Pictured: The clash was sparked over the Bailiff's last sitting before he retires.

“I cannot accept that a lawyer of the Chairman’s experience would inadvertently have drafted such an unfortunate juxtaposition of words… Her linkage of the allegations of lack of fairness and transparency in decision-taking by the Bailiff to historic child abuse was a grave error. 

“I reject that linkage and the underlying assumptions absolutely. The inquiry had no basis for saying it and it is not true.” 

His statement from the chair of the States Chamber and his reaction to questions from politicians afterwards has sparked controversy amongst States Members – particularly the Children's Minister, Senator Sam Mézec, who has previously fought to scrap the Bailiff's dual role. The Minister also says that he tried to make a statement in response to the speech during the sitting, but that he was refused permission by the Bailiff.

Directly following the statement, several points of order were raised by Members including from Deputy Mike Higgins who dubbed the speech “inappropriate” and accused the Bailiff of stalling questions and propositions relating to the Care Inquiry. 

The Children’s Minister also raised a point of order, asking the Bailiff: “After a political statement there is usually an opportunity for 15 minutes of questions – will we get that opportunity with you, sir?"

The Bailiff refused this request – which was also moved for by Deputy Montfort Tadier – as he said that it wasn’t a political statement but a communication by the presiding officer under the protocol which governs the States Assembly. 


Pictured: Sir William will retire from the role next week.

Senator Mézec, who has led the charge for separating the role of Bailiff and electing an impartial ‘speaker’ to preside over political debates, issued a statement following the Bailiff’s speech saying: “The job of the President of the States Assembly is to facilitate elected members in fulfilling their democratic mandates. It is not his role to seek to influence which policies are enacted.

“Where the government makes mistakes or adopts policies which are wrong, it is for elected members of the Assembly to challenge the government, and the presiding officer must facilitate that challenge, but not take part in it from a position of privilege where he is not able to be held to account himself.”

Although the Bailiff refuted the presence of the ‘Jersey Way,’ arguing that the Inquiry had “no tangible evidence” to support that such a culture exists in the island, Senator Mézec said that Sir William’s statement was in itself proof.

“The Bailiff’s statement this morning was a clear attempt to influence and a clear example of the Jersey Way.” 

In addition to this, the Children’s Minister said that Sir William’s comments would “harm the healing process post-Care Inquiry.”

READ MORE: Click below to read the Bailiff's statement in full...


Sign up to newsletter



Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.

Once your comment has been submitted, it won’t appear immediately. There is no need to submit it more than once. Comments are published at the discretion of Bailiwick Publishing, and will include your username.

Posted by Dave Mathews on
Why is Senator Mezec effectively saying the Bailiff is not allowed an opinion on the Bailiff's future role in the States? I listened to Sir William Bailhache speech and I thought it was well presented and effectively raised concerns people may have about how the Care Inquiry was directed. People have the right to either disagree with Sir William, ignore Sir William or support his view. But for goodness sake don't try and stop him having his say Senator Mezec.
Posted by John Henwood on
Mr Mathews overlooks the fact that, as President of the States Assembly, the Bailiff is supposed to maintain impartiality on all matters of a political nature. The future of the Bailiff’s role is indisputably a matter for elected members of the States, not non-elected members - the Crown officers and the Dean. Sir William’s insistence on interfering - this is by no means the firs time he has done so - serves to underline the importance of removing the Bailiff from the role of Speaker. It has to be said, one of his predecessors, his brother Sir Philip Bailhache, was equally adept at interfering in political matters during his tenure as Bailiff. When he returned to the States as a Senator (he had previously been a Deputy) he was of course free to express political views. It’s just a shame he diminished the stature of the role of Bailiff by his occasional apparent lack of impartiality in political affairs when holder of the highest office the Island has to offer.
To place a comment please login

You have landed on the Bailiwick Express website, however it appears you are based in . Would you like to stay on the site, or visit the site?