Powers of arrest could be granted to private security firm employees who protect Bermuda’s courts, it was announced yesterday.MP Michael Scott revealed the news as he delivered details of the Ministry of Justice budget for the next year.He noted there has been an increase in the number of trials involving crimes of violence and large numbers of defendants.“We continue to monitor the level of security threat and cooperate fully with the police and corrections in respect to individual trials where appropriate. Should the increase in multi-defendant and factional cases continue, we will have to consider more permanent measures of protection for our Supreme Courts,” he told the House of Assembly.“The increasing numbers of violent high-risk individuals being brought before our courts for gun and weapons offences coupled with the presence of friends and family members along with those of their victims presents a potentially unsafe environment for staff, judges, magistrates and for the public at large.“In the Supreme Courts, where we don’t have permanent security personnel in place, we continue to work with the police and private security to ensure adequate measures are implemented. We continue to review the need for extra security devices including cameras and additional metal detectors.”Mr Scott said temporary metal detectors are currently provided by private security companies on a case-by-case basis. He went on to explain that at Magistrates’ Court, where there are four courtrooms, the police currently only supply security within court one, for plea court and for high profile cases in the other courts.The remainder of the security is provided by an outside firm. Mr Scott said “highly trained security personnel” operate permanent metal detectors, do physical searches and provide “first line response to emergencies and safety breaches” as well as patrolling the Magistrates’ Court building.“The courts have become forced to become more dependant on these officers as first line responders as the police move their officers from static points to the streets to deal with violent crime,” said Mr Scott.“This creates an issue for the courts as the powers of arrest for these personnel are limited compared to the police officers and legislation may have to be considered to evaluate the need for an increase in those powers.”Mr Scott also mentioned a recurring complaint that there is a need for modern Supreme Court facilities to handle criminal trials. The Supreme Court is currently located on three different sites. A purpose built commercial court moved into the Government Administration Building on Parliament Street in 2010.Chief Justice Richard Ground has repeatedly spoken out over the “desperate need” for new Supreme Court buildings to handle criminal trials, however. He has expressed concerns over security at the current antiquated facilities, which are Supreme Court One, housed in the 197-year-old Sessions House, and Supreme Court Three, in the 218-year-old Custom House.The top judge said in 2009: “There’s only one entrance for the public, for the jury and for witnesses at court three. It’s very difficult to secure the court.”He also pointed out that members of the jury have to make their way in and out through the public gallery. Meanwhile, witnesses and jurors have to use the same crowded hallway to get to the courtroom as the defendants, lawyers and members of the public.In Supreme Court One, defendants have to walk through the public gallery to get to the dock. The gallery is often packed with friends and family of the victims and accused alike, and tensions can run high.Yesterday, Mr Scott said: “Hopefully a plan can be developed in the medium term for a purpose-built facility.” He made almost identical comments when he addressed the Justice budget in March last year.