Letter of the Day | Delroy Chuck and the long test of justice reform
Published:Monday | December 22, 2025 | 12:08 AM
THE EDITOR, Madam:
Few public officials in modern Jamaica have served as long in a single portfolio as Justice Minister Delroy Chuck. Such longevity invites neither praise nor condemnation by default; it demands careful evaluation. The proper question is whether this extended stewardship has strengthened the rule of law and honoured the constitutional obligations of his office.
When Mr Chuck assumed the portfolio, Jamaica’s legal system was burdened by outdated statutes, archaic procedures, and fines so eroded by inflation that they had lost their deterrent value. One of the more consequential, though largely unnoticed, reforms during his tenure was the Law Reform (Amendment of Penalties) Act, 2019. By allowing monetary penalties to be updated more systematically, it addressed a long-standing legislative weakness that had quietly undermined enforcement and public confidence. This was not glamorous reform, but it was necessary and constitutionally relevant, as ineffective penalties weaken equality before the law.
His record also shows a clear preference for modernisation rather than mass repeal of obsolete laws. Investments in legislative drafting systems, electronic processing, and law-revision mechanisms suggest an effort to repair the machinery of lawmaking itself. Critics may fairly argue that Jamaica still lacks a transparent, itemised programme for purging obsolete statutes from the books. After nearly a decade, the absence of a clearly published “obsolete laws repealed” register is a legitimate concern. Longevity in office raises expectations, and the public is entitled to ask why this task remains unfinished.
Access to justice has been a consistent theme of the minister’s stewardship. Chronic court delays touch directly on constitutional rights, including the right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time. By framing backlog reduction, digitisation, and alternative dispute resolution as constitutional necessities, rather than optional efficiencies, the minister has acknowledged the deeper stakes involved.
Ultimately, a justice minister’s oath is measured, not by speeches, but by respect for constitutional boundaries and institutions. On balance, Mr Chuck’s tenure reflects incremental, institution-focused reform rather than disregard for constitutional supremacy. That said, persistence of delays, public frustration with enforcement, and the slow removal of obsolete laws indicate that the task remains incomplete.
Mr Chuck has not betrayed his oath but, after nearly 10 years, Jamaicans are justified in expecting clearer outcomes. Constitutional stewardship is not a destination but a continuing duty – one that must now deliver more visible results for the people it serves.
DUDLEY MCLEAN II