THE following summary was included with the report:
The inquiry addressed:
(1) The sequence of events which led to the failure to communicate the Government's decision to Judge Lynch. The results of our efforts to follow the "paper trail" came to an unsatisfactory dead-end at crucial points, with key individuals unable to recollect important details, or failing to recognise the seriousness of vital correspondence;
(2) The causes of failure, which included:
absence of a procedure for removing a judge from the Panel of Judges of the Special Criminal Court;
- failure of the Department of Justice to adapt to major external forces and trends;
- inappropriate institutional framework;
- inappropriate organisational structure for the Courts Division and the Department of Justice as a whole;
- very weak management processes;
- work overload;
- staff inexperience and poor job handover from previous incumbents;
- other shortcomings in personnel policy and practice;
- inadequate information technology support;
- human error.
We take the view the human error in this case cannot be explained away entirely as being due to organisation, management and systems weaknesses.
Based on our investigation we make a number of recommendations:
- establish a simple "fail-safe" system for delisting a judge from the Special Criminal Court Panel;
- institute a comprehensive redesign and documentation of procedures;
- harness potential of Information Technology;
- redesign the institutional framework;
- set up a proper structure for the Courts Division;
- develop a managerial ethos;
- significantly strengthen personnel policy and practice;
- confront individuals who are deemed to have failed;
- identify and act upon other issues needing immediate attention.
We conclude by asserting that, if the report is not to be left to gather dust after a short flurry of activity, the following factors are crucial:
- sustained political will, reflected in financial and other support;
- time made available by the Department's senior and middle management;
- external support;
- openness on the part of the Department;
- not reducing the whole issue to one of staff resources;
- external review and public accountability;
- urgency and bias towards action.
In conclusion, the same urgency demonstrated recently with new initiatives in the Justice domain needs to be applied to reforming the Department of Justice itself.