AG appeals HC decision that persons charged with indictable offences cannot be blacklisted

Jan 07, 2023 Court Stories, Features / Columnists, News

Kaieteur News – Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs Anial Nandlall, SC is challenging the decision of Justice Navindra Singh in the Marcelene Washington v Attorney General of Guyana et al case which states that there is no written law in Guyana that authorises the Guyana Police Force (GPF) to limit the movement of persons out of Guyana solely because they have been charged with an indictable offence and placed on bail.

Attorney General Anil Nandlall, SC

Justice Singh on December 28, 2022 reasoned that the only condition attached to

the granting of bail is the future appearance of the person bailed in Court. If

the court granting bail determines that conditions, such as restricting a person’s

movement out of the jurisdiction, are needed, those conditions are attached to

the grant of bail, Justice Singh said.

Marcelene Washington, the Respondent in the Appeal, has been charged with

multiple counts of conspiracy to commit a felony contrary to Section 34 of the

Criminal Law (Offences) Act, Chap. 8:01, and those proceedings are currently

pending before the Georgetown Magistrates Court.

However, the Attorney General on Thursday filed a Notice of Appeal seeking to set aside the decision of Justice Singh.

Marcelene Washington, a Senior Superintendent of Police was charged with multiple counts of conspiracy to commit a felony and had moved to the High Court on several occasions previously for permission to leave the jurisdiction for medical reasons.

Her most recent action sought orders which would no longer require her to apply to the High Court every time she is desirous of leaving the jurisdiction.

Commissioner of Police (ag) Clifton Hicken

In a statement, the Attorney General’s Office said that “Given the impact of Justice Singh’s decision on the administration of justice, the Attorney General, this morning [Friday], also filed a Notice of Motion for an early date to be fixed for the hearing and determination of the appeal, for the usual formalities to be dispensed with, and for the Record of Appeal to be settled urgently in order to facilitate such an expedited hearing.”

According to the Notice of Appeal, filed on January 5, 2023 Nandlall contends among other things, that:

the Criminal Law (Procedure) Act, Chapter 10:01 Laws of Guyana restricts persons charged with an indictable offence and who have been granted bail with surety from leaving the jurisdiction without the permission of the Court;
this restriction is contemplated, and permitted by Article 148 (3) of the Constitution of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana, Chapter 1:01, Laws of Guyana; and
The Learned Hearing Judge was bound by the principle of stare decisis [to stand by things decided] to follow the precedent of Clarence Hughes v Attorney General Civ appeal No. 57 of 1979, which exemplifies the arguments of the Attorney General.

Further, in the Notice of Motion, the Attorney General posits that the decision of the trial judge violates, and is in conflict with express provisions of the Constitution, established principles of law, and precedent.

Meanwhile, in the Affidavit in Support of the Notice of Motion requesting that the appeal be heard and determined early, Clifton Hicken, Commissioner of Police (ag), posited that “the ruling of the Honourable Hearing Judge has deep and far-reaching ramifications for the rule of law and, in particular, the administration of criminal justice in Guyana.”

“In my position as Commissioner of Police (Ag.), I have knowledge that hundreds of persons charged with indictable offences and granted bail with sureties can now flee the jurisdiction with impunity, and certainly, without the supervisory role of the High Court,” Hickens said in the Affidavit in Support of the Notice of Motion.