the
UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE AND OTHER CRUEL INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMIENT
OR PUNISHMIENT

Written in Jersey   on 20th October 1 99 8
 

Jersey has been described elsewhere in the 'Country Profile' prepared by the States of Jersey but it presents a rather glossy 'P.R.' view of Island institutions and practices.  The Island has a tradition of promoting a favourable image for the purposes of its Tourism Industry but critical observations have never been so actively discouraged as they are now in the name of The 'Finance Centre' business that dominates island life.

The pursuit of individual civil rights is not a priority in this community and international obligations seem to be treated generally as an unwelcome imposition upon The Island's governmental, administrative, legal, penal and policy systems.  Of course, it may be true that this small territory might find it burdensome to properly monitor and implement each and every international aspiration, even if it was a willing and enthusiastic participant.  Smallness, though is not an excuse for failing to try.

That no anti-discriminatory legislation at all has been enacted in Jersey (to promote equal opportunities or discourage race or gender discrimination for example) even though, The Island is a (token) signatory to many conventions, is indicative of The Islands inherent disregard for internationally accepted standards.

Furthermore it must also be noted that discriminatory Laws and Policies are actually applied in The Island with regard to housing, employment and welfare which tend to be 'degrading' (The qualified v the nonqualified) for many thousands of long term residents and so encourage a general climate for acceptance of discrimination and unfairness.

it is also significant that Jersey has not ratified some important international conventions such as those to Eliminate Discrimination against Women and to Protect The Rights of The Child.

I believe that Jersey and the other Dependent Territories cannot be excused from their responsibilities with regard to promoting human rights on the grounds of their smallness and 1 am very critical of the difficulties personally encountered in discovering what is happening, or should be happening with regard to The Islands international responsibilities.

Thus, it has been particularly difficult to discover when The Reports from The Dependent Territories are to be considered under this (or other) conventions.

Since there are no NGO's in Jersey, informed comment is unlikely to be submitted unless some U.K. based organisation happens upon some particular Island matter of concern by chance and is prepared and able to submit comments.  This is not at all satisfactory.

The absence of comment upon the reports of such places as Jersey should not be taken as absence of grounds for complaint and 1 wonder how The UN or The Island or UK Governments might be required to promote greater awareness and public participation?

I think that The Committee should know that I have personally campaigned for many years in Jersey to promote knowledge of  "human rights" through organising seminars (for example) with visiting experts from the U.K. (largely at my own expense) and with little or no support from The Jersey Government, or the legal profession or police.

Nevertheless, 1 do take credit for prompting The Jersey Government to prepare a list of the many international treaties, conventions etc. that apply here (now available in the public library) and for making public such reports as are prepared and submitted to the U.N. Such reports submitted to the ILO are not yet so published.

Unfortunately, 1 have failed to convince the Government that it is equally important to make available locally the texts of the conventions that have been ratified or are being reported upon.  Nor have I managed to persuade Jersey's tiny legal profession (about 140 lawyers) that they should be showing a learned interest in The Islands human rights obligations besides their obsessive devotion to The Finance Industry.

Although such comments may not seem particularly relevant in this context 1 do not claim any expert knowledge and 1 am not a lawyer and therefore regret
especially the lack of informed comments from those with specialist and professional knowledge.   It seems that the small Dependencies are especially neglected in this regard and 1 wonder how the situation might be improved?

With specific regard to Jersey's record on 'Torture' I  am pleased to acknowledge that there is no evidence of such activity taking place in this Island and that the extreme ill treatment experienced by many people elsewhere in the world is not known here.

However, I am aware that the meaning of such terms as ' inhuman' and 'degrading' have been interpreted under the ECHR etc. to include behaviour and
practices which might occur in the Island.

Cases do arise from time to time where mistreatment is alleged by those in detention. ( for example) but my own information is restricted to that which becomes public knowledge through the diligence of the local media. I enclose some photocopies from the Jersey Evening Post but would emphasise that Island journalists are not generally more motivated to expose abuses, than their colleagues in The Legal profession.  However the J.E.P. has published in depth reports on specific issues such as Racism, and Poverty which are most welcome.

In the absence of any informed groups actually able to monitor "human rights" in Jersey, especially among those detained for alleged crimes or attempting to land in Jersey at the harbour or airport, factual information is not readily available.

Such lack of information is not unusual and in the Report of The Judicial & Legal Services Review Committee (States of Jersey March 1991) para 13.1
stated;-

"We conclude our report by drawing attention to a matter upon which, although it lies outside our terms , we have formed a strong view. We have had much discussion of the special characteristic of jersey Law and the desirability , as many see it, of jersey retaining its own system of Law.

It seems to us to be certain that in the long run Jersey Law will cease to be an effective System if it remains as inaccessible as it is today.  Indeed we venture to say it is undesirable for a society to live under a system of Law, many of the rules of which are, undiscoverable by a layman except by reference to a lawyer ".

and 1 3. 2: -

"There is no comprehensive statement or discussion of the Law of Jersey.  Its most authoritative writers lived in the 17th century  .......

It is this background of lack of access to information that frustrates my efforts to unravel Jersey's practices.  Even though in themselves not to be considered 'inhuman 4 or 'degrading' activities, but serve to encourage an indifference to even more serious defects.  Ignorance may seem to be bliss but it makes informed comment very difficult.

1 have enclosed photocopies of 'JEP' articles to indicate some of the practices that are of concern to me but it would simply be too much of a task to expand on these in my own words.  However, 1 believe it is essential to stress that the deplorable failures of The Jersey legal profession warrant a few words because those failures are so central to other complaints.

Jersey lawyers enjoy a total monopoly in the provision of legal services in this Island.  That monopoly is protected by Law (and reinforced under new legislation proposed by the profession) so that no other persons may advise on Jersey Law in this Island.  Even organisations like The Citizens Advice Bureau are not supposed to give legal advice and The Legal Aid Scheme is painfully inadequate (not state funded etc.). Thus there is a legal information void in Jersey which inevitably has serious implications for people seeking to determine their rights and obligation on an everyday basis.

However my special concern is that those persons in unusual circumstances (detained by police, or immigration officers, imprisoned or hospitalised) are especially vulnerable in this void because they tend to be the most in need of specialist legal advice and the system is simply not enabled to provide it.  This has to be coupled with my anxiety where the legal profession is not even interested in providing that specialist legal advice service.  NGOs like 'Liberty' or 'Inquest' or 'Justice' are not present in Jersey and so do not provide any information relating to the Island and its peculiarities.

The situation is very similar in Guernsey and I hope that the Committee might consider the report from that Island with my comments in mind.

1 regret not being able to devote more time and resources to preparing these comments but The Committee will hopefully understand that 1 have neither.