Court Visit Assignment

The court is regarded as a temple of justice. Mauritius as compared to the UK has a single structured judicial system which consists of two-part of the hierarchy namely the supreme court and subordinate courts. However, the United Kingdom does not have a single unified judicial system. This report will be an account of my visit to the Mauritius Supreme Court and the comparison of the structure and the proceedings with the UK.

The atmosphere in the Mauritius courtroom was quite tense and there was a lot of stress on behalf of the accused.

The room was crowded with people. The judge’s table is in front of the room facing the barristers and the public. Similarly, in the Crown Court, the position of the judge is in front. There are the court clerks who are administrative workers who manage the clerical functions in both courts. In the two courts, there is an usher who is involved in escorting participants to the courtroom and take messages from the judge and jury.

In Mauritius, the accused are sat in the witness box by the side of the room while in the UK, the accused must stand up in glass box where across them there is a set of 12 juries who are sat there.

All court officials maintained a formal dress code. In the Supreme court, the judge and the lawyers wore a white collar and a black gown. However, in the Crown Court, the judge wears a wig, violet and black robe, and a red tippet on the left shoulder.

Get quality help now

RhizMan

Verified

Proficient in: Common Law

4.9 (247)

“ Rhizman is absolutely amazing at what he does . I highly recommend him if you need an assignment done ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

The barristers also wear a wig. In Mauritius, the police officers accompanied the prisoners with handcuffed on their hands. There were also two prison officers and four Special Supporting units (SSU) in their official’s uniforms in the room in concern to the case. In the courtroom, when the lady judge arrived, everyone stood up and bow to show respect to her. The relationship between the judge and the lawyers are very professional. They addressed the judge as ‘My Lord’ both in Mauritius and the UK. The prosecutor was maintaining a connection with its witnesses.

I witnessed the case of The State v Rudolf Derek Jean Jacque and Anor which was a retrial one. The case consists of two main accused Derek Jean Jaques and its co-accused Westley Bruno Casimir who got arrested for 12 kilograms of heroin. The criminals have already been in prison for 7 years before. Due to the death of Judge Pritivi Fekna, the case was restarted and was handed to Judge Shameen Hamuth Laulloo. Furthermore, having two accused their respective lawyer presented their motion. The prosecutor on his behalf objected their motion based on his argument. Thus, the Judge decided that the case would be postponed for next hearing where all prime evidence and testimonies should be present.

The proceeding of the case was quite clear where all arguments on both sides were brought forward. There was a good presentation of the case and it was easy to follow the proceedings. The English language is the prime language in both courts. Nonetheless, in Mauritius the local language and French are used if the witness or accused do not understand English. In concern of UK case, the outcome led to a sentence of the accused with ‘3 years’ imprisonment, where we can see that the judge before giving its judgement should base on the guidelines from the sentencing council. The judge explained the judgement well and gave out the reason why he set out such an outcome.

In the Mauritius courtroom, due to limited space, there were many people standing in the room to attend the proceedings. A suggesting improvement would be that the room should be enlarged so that there is enough space both for the general public and witnesses. Another main issue for both court, there has been no brief of the case found anywhere which created confusion. To avoid such circumstances in future, it would be more supportive if some infographic being put in order to explain the process of the case. Since such a method can help to create awareness in people attending the proceedings.

Having examined the court from different perspectives, it can be concluded that Mauritius and the United Kingdom have a different way of operating for a case. As some aspects of the court may be alike while some may differ. But with changes in the courtroom, this can lead to a better understanding of the people.