AG: Terrorism threatens TT

"Trinidad and Tobago faces a real threat of terrorism. I say so. And I say so without fear of contradiction."

He referred to the recent jailing in the United States of Jamaat al Muslimeen member, Lance Small, for attempted arms-trafficking, to prove that the Government was serious about fighting terrorism.

"That man in Florida, who they (UNC) refer to, is there because of my efforts and the efforts of a team of lawyers." He said the Government had taken a decision to fight terrorism with every resource of the State. He admitted that such a Bill brought hard choices, saying, "Any derogation of fundamental rights must be in proportion to the threat."

In preparing the Bill, he assured, the Government had sought the views of a wide cross-section of people.

Jeremie said the Bill was a proper balance between the rights of the individual and rights of the society to protect itself.

He addressed the concerns of Independent Senator Prof Ken Ramchand that our freedoms under the National Constitution might be breached by Section 23 of the Bill, which allows a police officer with the written consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to ask a judge for an order to detain someone he reasonably believes will commit a terrorist act, or interfere in the investigation of a terrorist act.

Saying the Bill allows detention for up to 14 days, instead of the usual 48 hours which the common law allows the police to detain a suspect, Jeremie said the safeguard against abuse of the Bill was the participation of the Judiciary. "The Bill puts in a judicial officer as the guardian of the Constitution."

The court can only grant a detention order if it has "reasonable grounds," and this determination is not to be made by the police, he said.

He assured that the Government recognised the need for a balance between tackling terrorism and upholding freedoms.

Jeremie also noted that the Constitution itself has safeguards against oppressive acts. Section 4(a) says a person is not to be deprived of property without due process, he said, while Section 5(2) prohibits arbitrary detention, mandates prompt trials, and permits the use of habeas corpus.

Jeremie pointed to past cases like that of "Thornhill" and "Ulric Bobb vs AG" where the Privy Council had ruled that detention be stated not for a particular period of 48 hours, but for a period that was required. Jeremie said, "The cases are saying you have to determine what is ‘reasonable’ in the circumstances."

He added that a Lord Millet had once said, "The lawfulness of a detention depends on the circumstances of each case." Jeremie assured that "due process" would stop the Bill from being abused.

"The power of the police is balanced by the power of the courts. That is reasonable in a society that has respect for the rule of law and a society like ours which confronts the perils of terrorism."

The Bill is due to go to a Select Committee of the Senate.