Fitz-Henley against push to scrap mandatory 15-year gun sentences

Government Senator Abka Fitz-Henley has come out against the push by defence attorneys and others to have the Firearms Act amended to remove the mandatory minimum penalty of 15 years, arguing that such a move would weaken the legislation and undermine the fight against crime, particularly gun offences and murders.

On Wednesday, defence lawyers staged a silent protest outside the Supreme Court in downtown Kingston against the law, arguing that the provision removes the discretion of judges to consider the individual circumstances of each case when imposing a sentence.

They described the law as an injustice to Jamaicans.

The defence lawyers have vowed to withdraw their services from Jamaica’s criminal courts for one week, beginning Monday, September 28, as they press the Government on the matter.

Fitz-Henley, in a statement on Friday, argued that any perceived or substantive effort to weaken the Firearms (Prohibition, Restriction and Regulation) Act, which was approved in 2022, should be strongly resisted.

He argued that Jamaica has seen the benefits of stronger penalties for gun offences and that inroads should be maintained.

“In fairness, with consideration for the creative industry, I do not oppose revision of aspects of the law which pertain to imitation firearms. However, as far as the overall 2022 amendments are concerned, including the imposition of a mandatory minimum penalty, the data suggest that, if we are to further significantly reduce incidents of gun crime, including murder, and stamp out a destructive and painful culture of gun violence which has burdened our country for too long, the Government must stay the legislative course. We should not be inveigled into action which diminishes the positive results-oriented path we have embarked upon, which is one which augurs well for the creation of a safer and more secure Jamaica.”

Fitz-Henley, who is State Minister in the Office of the Prime Minister, also rejected as inaccurate a suggestion by some stakeholders that the empirical evidence does not indicate that there has been a corresponding reduction in the number of gun-related offences or cases brought before the Gun Court since the passage of the Act in 2022.

He argued that there has been a corresponding reduction in the number of new serious gun-related cases since the passage of the law.

He said aspects of an impact analysis of the amended Firearms Act in Jamaica and new cases presented to the Gun Court, which took into consideration official judicial statistics, confirm that, following the enactment of the Firearms Act in November 2022, new gun-related cases entering the formal justice system have noticeably decreased.

“When new case filings within the High Court Division of the Gun Court are used as the definitive institutional proxy for serious firearm offences, the statistical record provided by the Court Administration Division (CAD) provides a direct answer to the core inquiry: whether the legislative amendment coincides with a distinct contraction in gun crime incidence placed before the court. The answer is yes. There have been approximately double-digit declines.”

According to Fitz-Henley, data from the CAD reveal that, when the immediate pre-legislation benchmark of 2021, when there were 403 new cases brought before the Gun Court, is compared to the first post-amendment calendar year in 2024, when there were 363 filings in gun cases, the Court registered an initial intake reduction of approximately 10 per cent.

The Senator noted that this confirms a nearly double-digit decline in the number of persons prosecuted and brought before the Gun Court following the passage of mandatory minimum penalties of 15 years in relation to particular gun offences.

Fitz-Henley said, furthermore, the data provided by the CAD also confirm double-digit medium-term systemic contraction, or declines, in the number of new Gun Court cases when evaluated against the historical pre-reform peak in 2019.

According to him, in 2019, there were 508 new cases brought before the Gun Court, with total annual case intake contracting to 363 new filings in 2024 and 389 new filings in 2025.

He asserted that, when compared to 2019, this represents an overall structural reduction of 28 per cent in 2024 and 23.4 per cent in 2025 in new gun cases entered into the Court docket since the passage of the 2022 Firearms Act.

“I am advised that the data which have been tabulated so far for the Hilary Term suggest that 86 new gun cases were brought before the court this year, which, if replicated across the remaining terms, will secure another double-digit decline in new cases brought before the Gun Court when 2026 is compared to years prior to the passage of the Act.”

Fitz-Henley reasoned: “While debate may continue concerning causation and correlation, the aforementioned data not only repel as inaccurate suggestions that the empirical evidence does not indicate that there has been a corresponding reduction in the number of new gun-related cases since the 2022 passage of revised gun laws, but also provide support for a view expressed by law enforcement that, since the passage of the act, their information indicates that more people, including prospective criminals, have thought twice about placing themselves in circumstances where they may be prosecuted for gun-related offences and have, in fact, judiciously elected to proceed along a lawful path.”

Senator Fitz-Henley argued that it is worth noting that, in the years subsequent to 2022, when Jamaica’s gun laws were amended and there were 1,498 murders in Jamaica, murders have plummeted by over 55 per cent, with 673 people murdered in 2025.

Those reductions have continued into the current year, he stated.

“It is also deserving of considerable contemplation that, prior to the consecutive years of decline which began in 2023, Jamaica had recorded almost 40,000 murders over the previous 30 to 35 years. That’s beyond the capacity of a full National Stadium in Kingston. The gun has been the weapon of choice in the vast majority of the murders. I fully support the mandatory minimum penalty for particular gun offences and am of the view that efforts by some stakeholders, including the Opposition Spokesman on Justice, Ms Zuleika Jess, to denigrate amended gun laws as unnecessarily ‘merciless’ should be repelled.”

Fitz-Henley reasoned that, in debating the issue of mandatory minimum sentences, one should not forget the multiple prior cases which prompted justifiable public outrage and consternation when perceived light sentences were handed down to people convicted of serious gun crimes.

“The retort from some stakeholders to the consternation was often along the lines of a sentiment which intimated: ‘Blame the legislators, for it is they who arrogated unto the judiciary a bandwidth which allows for leniency.’ The emerging evidence is clear. Our legislators have acted and sent a clear policy signal, and we are obtaining positive results. I do not believe those results should be disturbed by a few stakeholder groups who, when nearly 40,000 Jamaicans were being murdered by the gun over the past three and a half decades, were not at any time motivated to pursue curious high-profile protests in the vicinity of our court, but this week resorted to such action as they seek to add fuel to their push for radical revision of a more draconian gun law which was passed in 2022.”

Follow The Gleaner on X, formerly Twitter, and Instagram @JamaicaGleaner and on Facebook @GleanerJamaica. Send us a message on WhatsApp at 1-876-499-0169 or email us at onlinefeedback@gleanerjm.com or editors@gleanerjm.com.