Support for swift justice

The Bill seeks to grant powers to the Director of Public Prose-cutions (DPP) to have certain matters taken straight to the High Court, bypassing the Preliminary Inquiry at the Magistrates’ Court.

During yesterday’s debate in the Senate, Opposition Senator Wade Mark said the UNC was not supporting the Bill in its current form.

He suggested that Govern-ment either withdraw the legislation and redraft it, or that it be passed with a specified majority.

Mark also asked that the Bill be referred to a Special Select Committee of Parliament for "proper refining."

He said he found it strange that the parent legislation which did not grant powers to the DPP required a special majority, and this Bill did not.

Mark said the purpose of the Bill was to avoid judicial scrutiny.

He referred to the Brad Boyce case and the subsequent motion of appeal before the Court of Appeal by the DPP.

Mark said the presiding appellant judges noted that legislation creating the right to appeal should be passed by a three-fifths majority.

He said although the matter was still pending at the Privy Council, the Government was not prepared to await the judgment, but rather proceed to parachute new legislation into law.

Told by Attorney General John Jeremie that he (Mark) was suggesting that the Bill was to railroad the appeal, Mark insisted he was not doing that. Instead, he told Jeremie that he was acting nervous, because he (AG) knew that the Bill was oppressive.

Mark later asked if the legislation was political, and was told by Local Government Minister Rennie Dumas that all legislation was political.

Mark went further to say that the Bill could be used against political opponents and attacked the DPP, saying the public had lost confidence in him (Geoffrey Henderson). Mark was warned on several occasions by Vice President Rawle Titus not to refer to the office holder, but the office.

Mark later charged that if the Bill had come into being a year or two ago, persons like Dhanraj Singh and Dr Vijay Naraynsingh would still be in jail rather than being freed of criminal charges at the PI stage.

Mark said the real problem with the Judiciary was the lack of resources.

He appealed to Government to provide it with funds "if you want to tackle crime and reduce the backlog."

Mark also called on the AG to investigate the alleged hiring of a civil attorney at a cost of more than $4 million. Mark said the attorney was retained to prosecute in the criminal matter relating to the Piarco Airport Inquiry.

He asked Jeremie to tell the nation what action was being taken to ensure that the population gets value for money on the Scarborough Regional Hospital project. Mark was supported in his objections to the Bill by colleague Dr Tim Gopeesingh.

Meanwhile, Independent Sen-ator Dana Seetahal said she was in support of the Bill because it limited the powers of the DPP to four issues.

She said she could see no objections from defence attorneys towards the Bill, if only because it would move matters along.

She noted that currently there was a significant backlog of cases at the magistrates’ court.

She was supported by fellow Independent Senator Prof Ramesh Deosaran.

He said there were sufficient safeguards and checks in the legislation.

He said from his perusal of the Bill there were no instances where the Constitution could be violated, and therefore the Bill would not infringe on the rights of accused persons.

However, Deosaran said he was tired of hearing about the rights of the accused, and wondered about the rights of the victim.

He also defended Henderson, saying as his former student, the allegations of political bias were "overdone and unfair."

Deosaran said so far he had not seen him as corrupt, and if that was the case, "I will be the first to call for censure." He suggested that maybe the time had come for the DPP to tell the public why matters are not expedited, and perhaps the public disenchantment might go away.

Deosaran noted that such attacks on the reputation of persons in public office caused people to shy away from holding such offices.