Woman loses court battle for redress
A WOMAN who was strip-searched at Piarco International Airport two years ago by members of the Organised Crime and Narcotics Unit, lost her High Court battle to have a judge declare that the police action was oppressive and disrespectful to her private and family life. In dismissing a constitutional motion yesterday, which was filed by Sara Ramhit, 38, of San Fernando, Justice Mark Mohammed declared that the case was an abuse of the process of the court. The judge ordered the woman to pay costs to the State. Ramhit was detained and interrogated at the airport by police officerson April 21, 2001.
Acting on “intelligence” and “certain information,” the officers proceeded to strip-search Ramhit. The woman was about to board BWIA flight 426 to New York at 3.20 pm. Ramhit filed a motion claiming that the body search was humiliating. She claimed that the officers had no reasonable justification for doing so. Ramhit further contended that while she was being searched, five policemen burst into the room at the airport. The State challenged the motion with PC Sean James swearing to an affidavit that Ramhit was not randomly selected to be strip-searched, and the search was only conducted following “intelligence” and “certain information.” In a ten-page judgement, Mohammed ruled that such a motion could only be fitting for the court’s attention when it raised a question of law — such as the constitutionality of random searches in general at the airport. That was not pleaded and Justice Mohammed further criticised the applicant for not presenting evidence of the manner such as the method of her detention and searches. In fact, Justice Mohammed said, that was Ramhit’s case but there was no evidence of it in her motion. Attorney Ronnie Bissessar represented Ramhit while senior State attorney Nadine Nabie successfully argued the State’s response to the motion. The judge stated that it was his view that Ramhit’s pursuit of the motion was inappropriate and an abuse of the process of the court. The judge ordered the woman to pay costs to the State.
Comments
"Woman loses court battle for redress"