Magistrates granting bail and the Police Force

Sep 19, 2025 Letters

Dear Editor,

I am moved to write this having been informed that a man was still being held at Lusignan Prison, a full 23 hours after the recognisance for his bail was paid. The police explained to the family that a required signature was missing and that this would be corrected. That appears to reflect churlishness on the part of the police – wholly unacceptable in a democratic society.

Someone accused of a criminal offence is, by law, presumed innocent until a properly constituted court might find him or her guilty after hearing and assessing all the material facts of the case. When charged with an offence in respect of which the law does not rule out the grant of bail before trial, every accused person is entitled to being granted bail – in the absence of strong reasons recognised by the law as good reasons to deny bail.

Allegations of serious criminal behaviour present a particular problem in the eyes of members of the public who are unaware (or not conscious of) the presumption of innocence. This is because the most serious of offences are tried on Indictment only – meaning that such offences can only be tried before the High Court during the Criminal Assizes.

Consequently, when a person accused of a grave offence less than murder is brought before the Magistrates’ Court, no plea is required to be entered – with the only immediate question being whether the accused will await his trial to be listed in the next Assizes (or even later) behind bars, or on bail with appropriate conditions attached to secure his attendance at court when required.

I read the recent social media GPF comment on the grant of bail to a man accused of committing a terrible assault, apparently aimed at one woman but also impacting upon the friend/colleague who was in her company. The said GPF comment reflected a total lack of understanding of the relevant law – not that surprising since the GPF is a law enforcement body. It is the Court that is charged with interpreting the law. Attorneys assist the Court in its task of interpretation of the law. There is no jurisdiction in the democratic world in which the police is recognised as a body that knows enough about the law to be responsible for judicial interpretation thereof.

It is a bit rich in any event, for the GPF to be given a free pass to cry foul about how the Court approaches legal procedure. The GPF routinely denies accused persons access to legal representation in the police station – by activating a host of psychological levers despite telling suspects they do have such a right. The GPF is also very selective about which matters to investigate and how to do so. Moreover, because some cases will inevitably be tried by jury, it is irresponsible of the GPF to release on social media the kind of disingenuous comment recently made about a particular grant of bail.

The CID branch of the GPF does indeed work hard at investigating serious crime. Such work is necessary and it is understandable that some jobs are more emotionally taxing than others. The GPF, however, is a body in place to serve the people of Guyana in accordance with the Constitution of Guyana – not in keeping with the reckless emotional fervour of a group of officers belonging to a specialist division of the GPF, who as professionals, should by their training know better.

Yours truly,
Ronald Bostwick
Attorney-at-Law

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

bail, Criminal Assizes, GPF, Lusignan Prison, Ronald Bostwick

Latest News