Latest update March 30th, 2026 12:35 AM
Latest News
- ‘Guyana will never see fair share of profits without ring-fencing’ – AFC
- Guyana’s peak electricity demand to surpass 1,500 MW by 2030 – GPL
- Teen girl killed in Moblissa crash
- Unidentified teen found floating in Demerara River
- War on Iran: U.S.-Israel dropped 12,000 bombs, hit 10,000 targets, 1,937 dead
Magistrate continues to fight termination
Apr 16, 2011 News
Magistrate Omeyana Hamilton and her legal party on Thursday returned to court for the continuation of her matter before Justice Diana Insanally.
At Thursday’s hearing there was no representative from the Judicial Service Commission, something that was described as “strange”.
Justice Insanally had granted an Order Nisi, which demands the Judicial Service Commission to show cause why the decision to sack magistrate Omeyana Hamilton, should not be reversed.
The magistrate, through her lawyer Nigel Hughes, filed an appeal against the JSC, indicating to the body the rules of 2010.
The appeal means that the action against Hamilton is deemed quashed until the appeal is heard.
However Lawyer for the JSC, Senior Counsel Ashton Chase is claiming that the rules of the JSC, under which Hughes has filed the appeal, are not yet operational.
But Minister of Legal Affairs, Charles Ramson, on November 18, 2010 in an interview with the Guyana Chronicle, said that the new rules of the JSC would see significant changes and raft of regulations will guide the approaches of the Judicial Service, dictate how benefits are conferred and, more importantly, the kind of conduct required of serving officers.
He said the stipulations address issues of conflict of interest, the fair exercise of official functions, discipline of officers and upholding the integrity of their office, which includes not conducting private business on Government property.
Magistrate Hamilton had filed a writ of Certiorari and Mandamus before Insanally, claiming that she was not afforded due process or a fair hearing when she met with Chancellor Carl Singh (ag) and Mr. Ganga Persaud. Hamilton was sacked with immediate effect last month.
In her affidavit of support, Hamilton said that she met with the two members of the Judicial Service Commission, after a complaint was made by Acting Chief Magistrate Priya Beharry.
Hamilton said that she believes that the Chancellor should not have been at the meeting, when considering the complaint of the Chief Magistrate, since “he had previously heard and determined my request not to travel to Bartica by speedboat.”
Further, in the affidavit, she stated that the Chancellor’s direction to magistrate Hamilton, to travel by speedboat even after he was informed about her medical issues, had placed himself in the position of the complainant and would not have properly sat to commence an investigation into the complaint of the Chief Magistrate.
By doing that, Hamilton said that the Chancellor’s presence could have injected the proceedings with bias therefore infringing her right to a fair hearing.
It was cited that the Judicial Service Commission acted ultra vires and in breach of the rules of natural justice when they purported to embark on the hearing of the Chief Magistrate.
Magistrate Hamilton, prior to her appointment, had served in the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. She also worked in the Magistrates’ Court and with Legal Aid.
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.