“Fundamental changes to the criminal justice system” will alter a defendant’s right to silence under legislation just approved by Parliament.

The changes are required ahead of the implementation of Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) legislation — the “final stages” of which Attorney-General Trevor Moniz said would be brought in by the end of the year.

PACE, which was approved nearly ten years ago, will cut the maximum time for Police detention from 48 to 24 hours, as the justice system shifts to “greater use of civil penalties and out-of-court disposals”, a spokesman for the Attorney-General told The Royal Gazette yesterday.

“Unfortunately, Bermuda has a 19th century criminal justice system that is finding it difficult to adapt to the stresses and strains of the 21st century,” he added.

“This has led to unconscionable delays, trauma and uncertainty for victims and professional criminals gaming the system to their advantage.”

The wide-ranging reforms that passed on Friday over strong Opposition misgivings came more than two years after Chief Justice Ian Kawaley condemned the criminal court system as “disgracefully inadequate”. While the Opposition backed some reforms, Shadow Attorney General Michael Scott said that overall the changes would bring “unpredicted consequences”.

Mr Moniz, he said, had “sought to sweeten what’s happening, but it’s very clear that if you exercise your right to silence, we now have a statute that says we can draw adverse inferences from your silence”.

“This is a major incursion, in our view,” Mr Scott said, noting that it had also been “cause for pause” by both the Police and the Defence Bar — and attributing some of the changes to pressure from interest groups. The policy means that judges and juries will be able to draw adverse inferences from “a criminal suspect who does not answer questions put to him or her where it would be reasonable to answer”, the spokesman for the Attorney General said.

Examples would include asking a suspect why they had been at the scene of a crime, why they had blood on their hands, or why they had been found carrying an offensive weapon?

Mr Moniz told MPs he was satisfied that the provisions being introduced were constitutional. “We are not removing the criminal suspect’s right to silence. What will change is there will now be reasonable consequences to exerting that right in an unreasonable way.”

For example, judges cannot allow adverse inference if the accused was not legally represented when he or she was silent to the Police.

In addition, a defendant’s constitutional right not to give evidence at trial would not be affected. The reforms will allow the prosecution a right of appeal when defendants get off on technicalities, and lawyers and other third parties can be ordered to pay the courts for wasted costs caused by negligent conduct.

The proposal that got the poorest reception from the Opposition was the power of the prosecution to revisit old cases involving serious offences where “new and compelling evidence” has emerged.

“There is no agenda here — I have had no involvement in criminal prosecutions whatsoever,” Mr Moniz said.

The Attorney General invoked Britain’s notorious Stephen Lawrence case of 1996 — the racially motivated murder of a young black man, attacked and fatally stabbed by a group of white youths while he waited for a bus. Two of Lawrence’s killers were not convicted until 2012.

“All we’re trying to do is create law in accordance with other first-rate jurisdictions, so we can hold our heads high,” Mr Moniz said, calling the reforms “an important paradigm shift”.

The Bermuda Bar Association had yet to comment on the reforms as of press time last night.

According to the spokesman for the AG’s Chambers, the next step would be to address the “premature criminalisation” of young Bermudians through an “alternatives to prosecution” programme. This would include amending the Police caution policy and introducing civil penalties for minor offences.