Opposition Senator Malaka Parker has warned that new legislation broadening police search warrant powers risks eroding constitutional protections against arbitrary searches. According to Antigua News Room, Parker made the remarks Monday during Senate debate on the Magistrates' Code of Procedure (Amendment) Bill 2026, arguing that Parliament should strengthen judicial oversight rather than grant wider authority without additional safeguards.
Speaking to her fellow senators, Parker said the bill goes beyond a routine legislative update by significantly expanding the circumstances under which search warrants may be issued. She took particular issue with a provision allowing magistrates to issue warrants where there is reasonable cause to believe that "an offence of any kind" has been or is being committed.
"I do not think this bill is forward-thinking. I do not think it is progressive. I do not think it is modernizing," Parker told the Senate, arguing the amendment broadens police powers without clearly defining their limits.
Parker noted that search warrants have traditionally been reserved for more serious offences, and questioned why the legislation was drafted to cover "any offence" rather than indictable or other serious criminal matters. She also warned that the proposal could invite constitutional challenges by altering the relationship between police powers, judicial oversight and citizens' rights to privacy.
The opposition senator further argued that while police have always been permitted to seize contraband plainly visible during the execution of a lawful warrant, the new legislation goes further by allowing evidence of other offences to be seized without clearly outlining the safeguards governing that process.
Parker proposed that any evidence recovered outside the original scope of a search warrant should be presented before a magistrate within 48 hours to ensure continued judicial supervision. She also urged the government to develop a comprehensive legal code governing search warrants, evidence retention and police procedures, rather than addressing those issues through piecemeal amendments.
"The police has to get a search warrant to begin with because judicial oversight is necessary to curtail the possibility of abuse and to secure and protect rights," Parker said.
Leader of Government Business in the Senate Shenella Govia rejected the suggestion that the amendment weakens constitutional protections. She argued instead that it modernizes outdated legislation to keep pace with increasingly sophisticated criminal activity.
Govia said criminals have become more organized and resourceful, and that law enforcement must be equipped with modern legal tools to investigate offences effectively.
"As a forward-thinking government, we want to ensure that as the world evolves, as time goes on, crime evolves," she said.
Govia defended the decision to replace references to specific offences with broader language, arguing it ensures search warrant provisions remain relevant regardless of how criminal activity changes over time. She also defended provisions allowing police to seize evidence of offences discovered while executing a lawful warrant.
"If you go into a house and you see a bag of illegal substance, what are you going to do?" she asked senators. "Crime has no restriction, no limits."
Govia stressed that the amendment does not eliminate judicial oversight, as officers must still satisfy a magistrate under oath before any search warrant can be issued. Government senators maintained that the changes are designed to strengthen public safety while preserving existing constitutional safeguards.
Despite the opposition's concerns and calls for additional protections, no amendments were accepted during the committee stage. The Senate subsequently passed the Magistrates' Code of Procedure (Amendment) Bill 2026 on its third reading, paving the way for the expanded search warrant provisions to become law.
