Bar Association President Elsworth Johnson has accused Commissioner Ellison Greenslade and National Security Minister Dr. Bernard Nottage of making "disingenuous statements" about bail.
Both Greenslade and Nottage renewed concerns last week about people accused of serious offenses being released pending trial.
Johnson said most discussions on bail occur in a vacuum.
"Everyone wants to pass the buck," he said.
"They never explain whether the Crown is fulfilling [its] obligation under the Bail Act.
"Judges are not soothsayers. They cannot read your minds and determine whether someone will reoffend, will interfere with a witness or will abscond.
"Courts are there to be fair and there is an obligation to bring evidence to show that these things will happen.
"This is not Nazi Germany. This is a country that subscribes to the universal declaration on human rights. A person is innocent until proven guilty."
Johnson noted that if prosecutors are dissatisfied with a bail ruling made by a judge, there is a right to appeal up to the Privy Council.
However, Johnson added this right is rarely exercised.
"It's disingenuous for the commissioner and the minister of national security to know the circumstances surrounding the grant of bail and then make public statements in a vacuum," he said.
"The commissioner and the minister of national security need to stop making these statements when they know full well they didn't live up to their responsibility."
Johnson said courts will not be bullied and they have the full support of the Bar while defending their jurisdiction.
He also echoed calls by Court of Appeal President Anita Allen to repeal mandatory minimum sentencing laws and an amendment to the Bail Act that prevents magistrates from granting bail in certain cases.
The former government introduced the restrictive laws in November 2011 as part of a package of bills aimed at addressing high crime levels.
Branding the laws "ludicrous", Johnson told The Nassau Guardian, "The decision to take the discretion from magistrates is a another knee-jerk solution by politicians who have no idea how to deal with crime."
Last week, a magistrate granted bail for two American men accused of manslaughter, an offense which can only be tried in the Supreme Court.
The Bail Act allowed the anomaly because manslaughter, which carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, is classified as a Part B offense.
A Part B offense is a charge for which a magistrate can consider bail at first instance.
However, the same magistrate is unable to consider bail for someone accused of drug possession with intent to supply, which is triable in the Magistrates' Court.
Additionally, the magistrate must now impose a sentence within the range of four to seven years upon conviction.
"It's ludicrous that someone is able to make a determination on whether there is enough evidence to take away the liberty of the subject, but they can't hear the bail application," Johnson said.
He said oftentimes people who are denied bail upon arraignment are released a short time later by the Supreme Court.
Three men arrested in a 50-pound marijuana seizure on March 7 were released on bail within a week of their arrests, although the magistrate was obliged to remand them on arraignment.
Prosecutors offered no objection to their release.
In January, Allen said 90 percent of magisterial appeals were against the imposition of the mandatory minimum sentences for drug, firearm and ammunition possession.

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian