DPP goes to court over Judge’s order for speedy trial for 52 prisoners

Jul 17, 2010 News

‘It’s impossible’

The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has moved to the court against the Attorney General after a judge ordered that 52 prisoners be brought speedily to trial.
Yesterday, Chief Justice (ag), Ian Chang, granted a Conservatory Order after DPP, Shalimar Ali-Hack, filed court documents claiming that the orders made by Justice Roxanne George-Wiltshire on May 27, 2010, at the April, 2010, Criminal Sessions for the Demerara Assizes, are illegal and without jurisdiction.
The DPP in the ex-parte application also asked for an order setting aside, canceling, recalling, rescinding and/or revoking the orders made by the Justice George-Wiltshire.
Representing the DPP are attorneys-at-law Anil Nandlall, Euclin Gomes and Manoj Narayan.
The DPP contended that on May 27, 2010, the Judge entertained submissions by lawyers for some prisoners who were before her. She also questioned the prisoners, the court documents said.
The Judge then made orders in respect of each prisoner.
Ali-Hack claimed that she attempted to seek clarification and wrote the Registrar of the Supreme Court requesting a copy of the orders made by Justice George-Wiltshire.
On July 7, a reply was sent from the Registrar (ag) of the Supreme Court detailing the orders.
According to those orders, the reply said, more than 50 prisoners were ordered to be brought to trial in the High Court between now and next year.
However, the DPP, in her arguments filed, said that at no time whatsoever was she afforded a fair and adequate hearing or given the opportunity to show cause why orders ought not to be made.
“In this regard, I am advised by Mr. Mohabir Anil Nandlall, Attorney-at-Law, and do verily believe that the said Orders were made contrary to and in breach of the rules of natural justice and are in violation of my fundamental right and freedom to a fair hearing which is guaranteed by Article 144 of the Constitution of Guyana.”
Ali-Hack also said that she believes that the Judge has completely usurped the functions of the DPP office “and is subjecting my office to Her Honour’s direction and control which is contrary to and in breach of article 187 (4).”
The DPP argued that the orders are unreasonable and it is an almost physically and legally impossible for the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions to comply with the same.
“That it is a fact of notoriety that only two Judges are assigned to sit at any given time at the Demerara Assizes and it is a near impossibility for these two Judges to hear and conclude the number of cases which were ordered by the Honourable Madam Justice Roxanne George-Wiltshire to be presented.”
According to Ali-Hack, two Judges hear and conclude an average of three cases each per session and they simply would be physically unable to comply with the said Orders.
She listed several examples over the last months.
In 2010 January, sessions there were 132 cases listed to be heard. “Only three indictments were heard; two by Justice Bovell Drakes and one by Justice Reynolds.
In 2010 April, sessions there were 137 cases listed to be heard. Only 3.5 indictments were heard; two by Justice George and 1.5 by Justice Ramlal.”
In 2009 January session, there were 94 cases listed to be heard. “Only six indictments were heard; three by Justice Patterson and three by Justice Reynolds.”
The DPP argued that based upon the said Judge’s orders, ten (10) cases are to be presented, heard and determined in the June Sessions alone; and this is assuming that the two Judges work for the entire Sessions and neither one of them proceeds on leave. “Having regard to the aforesaid statistics, it is highly unlikely that the ten (10 cases can be heard and determined in the June sessions. Additionally, the said Orders wholly disregard and do not take into account certain factors which are beyond my control but which impact upon my ability to present indictments in a timely fashion; for example, witnesses are sometimes not readily available because they are either overseas, in the interior or, have simply removed from their last known address and therefore, I have to ensure that witnesses are available before the indictment is presented.”

Latest News

DPP goes to court over Judge’s order for speedy trial for 52 prisoners

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | November, 11th, 2024

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Guyana Beverage Inc. on board with Petra to host 8th Annual Girls U11...

GFF launches NAMILCO/Maid Marian Wheat Up...

Semi’s bowls off tomorrow with...

NO SURPRISE!!

More support for Project “Cricket Gear for...

Guyana to participate at 2024 FIBA 3×3...

Features/Columnists

Poor Power Planning (PPP)

Rising Gun Crimes in the Caribbean: Urgent Action required by all

A Trump victory and me

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

DPP goes to court over Judge’s order for speedy trial for 52 prisoners

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | November, 11th, 2024

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]