Citizens must use the courts to achieve democratic restoration in Guyana

Jul 08, 2010 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

If the citizens of this country are going erase the ubiquity of state power before the next general elections, then the courts of this country offer unlimited possibility of doing so.
I sat behind Robert Corbin as he responded to the police charges against the truck owner who transported the school children from Patentia to the Ministry of Home Affairs to protest the killing of their school friend, Kelvin Fraser. Three charges were laid against the truck owner, two of which were exceedingly petty and nasty. One involved a tiny break on the license plate and on one of the trafficators.
I looked at the countenance of the Magistrate. There was disgust printed all over his face. He knew the man was a victim of political harassment. Then he requested a full explanation from the prosecutor as to why the police would want to detain the vehicle. Once it was not satisfactory, he would have ordered its release.
As it turned out the Magistrate misled. The prosecutor saw no reason why the vehicle would be detained thus the Magistrate did not issue a release order. As it turned out, the vehicle was impounded. We moved to the courts and the Chief Justice signed an order for the immediate re-possession by the owner.
Opposition activists, human rights crusaders and civil society actors who want to see the end of total control under the present government and the restoration of democratic rights must devote time and energy to confronting the rulers by wearing them down in the courts. Put them through the court system where they do not have total control.
Had it not been for the courts we would not have known that relatives of the DPP were searched at the airport and a series of events followed soon after. The courts will soon rule as to whether two public officials were victimized because of that search. (The courts discharged the charges yesterday).
In the affidavits submitted by Mr. Nigel Hughes, it was revealed that the DPP wrote to the police force advising dismissal of the dog handler who was involved in the perusal of her relatives’ luggage. The police and the DPP must issue unambiguous statements denying there was ever such a document.
Some notable victories from the courts over fascism include the dismissal of the charge against Mark Benschop for operating an alleged illegal radio transmitting device. The DPP has appealed to the Full Court.
One believes that was determined by the fact that Benschop would have to get back his device. Bail for murder has now been granted to three accused. The Government wanted to stop this process and appealed to Justice Insanally to quash the decision of another judge, Bovell-Drakes who granted bail in a murder case.
Then the bizarre occurred. Judge Insanally granted it. How can one judge, grant bail then another judge revokes that decision by way of an order? Now if that is legally permissible I do not agree. It reduced the law to an elephantine farce. Where will it end?
A judge gives me a NISI order to have Mr. Jones give me back my truck. The Attorney-General then applies for another order to overturn that order and it is awarded. Could the process go on forever? Can I now go to a third judge and ask him/her nullify decision number two?
It is time the opposition lawyers test the legality of the Ethnic Relation Commission.
Three important legal decisions against authoritarian rule give us hope before the next elections. First, the radio license monopoly was tested in court and the Chief Justice ruled that the plaintiff’s application must be given consideration.
Secondly, Oliver Hinckson’s sedition charge was thrown out. The pardon of Mark Benschop was a comedy of errors. No jury would have convicted Benschop. To prevent his heroic victory, the elected dictators moved quickly and produced a pardon hoping that they can say that Benschop was not acquitted.
Thirdly, the courts ordered the police to return Peter Ramsaroop’s electronic items.
Knowing that the court system offers itself as a bulwark against the concretization of fascism, the oligarchs have responded with more autocracy. The DPP can now appeal a decision by judge and jury.
The PPP told us that the PNC government from 1968 to 1992 was a dictatorship. But the PNC never went in that direction. That is a tyrannical pathway. Its purpose is to keep pro-democracy activists in jail for a long, long time. It was designed to plug the gargantuan hole that the autocrats have to live with- the courts are not going to be their floor cloth.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News