Lucky shares blows in the House

Independent UNC MP Gillian Lucky Friday lambasted Attorney General John Jeremie accusing him of misleading the Parliament, of “cheating” and of “insulting” Members of Parliament during the piloting of the Preliminary Inquiry Amendment Bill in the House of Representatives. The bill does two things — it would give the DPP the right to avoid the preliminary inquiry and it would give him the right to appeal to a judge in chambers to have the decision given by the magistrate at the preliminary inquiry, overturned. Lucky chastised the AG for “crossing the border” when he used as examples to bolster his case, the airport cases and the case against “a colleague,” a court matter against Basdeo Panday.

She said that  given the fact that people were already saying that these prosecutions were politically motivated, it was unfortunate that the AG should have chosen them as examples. “Why didn’t he use the Abu Bakr case?” she said. Lucky said people in the country wanted legislation that would prevent the escalation in crime. But, she noted, the problem with crime was not in the prosecution, but the detection. And, she said, Government was refusing to implement measures to improve detection. She said police were rescuing kidnapped victims after $500,000 was paid in ransom. “And when $1 million or $500,000 is paid in ransom, police officers only finding $100,000 and $200,000, ” she said.

Lucky asked what criteria would be used to determine which cases would go straight to the High Court and which would go before a preliminary inquiry. “Is it fraud cases, is it only for cases where you going after UNC MPs and financiers? If you (the AG) don’t say (what criteria would be used) it would raise the level of suspicion (in the public) and sharpen the political divide,” she said. Lucky said the bill, which was draconian, demanded a special majority for two reasons. Firstly, it proposed to give the DPP a right of appeal which he did not now enjoy and secondly it proposed to assign to the DPP a right which was not specifically provided for in the Constitution — that is the right to send matters straight to the High Court, without a preliminary inquiry.

She said the Government could not bypass the Constitution by saying, “We have a crime problem and since we have a duty to pass laws to improve the administration of justice, we are passing this bill (with a simple majority), whether or not it requires a special majority.” She noted that the AG quoted Lord Diplock in the case of Grant in Jamaica to substantiate his point that the DPP should have the power to send some cases straight to the High Court. However Lucky pointed out that in that case, Diplock made it clear that there was a coroner’s inquest (before the case was sent to the High Court) and therefore he believed that the DPP did not violate the rules of natural justice.

(Lucky argued that a coroner’s inquest was similar to a preliminary inquiry.) Furthermore, she stated he (Diplock) advised that the Jamaican law should be revised along the lines of  the UK legislation which allows the DPP to avoid the preliminary inquiry but he must get leave of a judge. Lucky was in such ripping form, as she slammed the Government, that La Brea MP Hedwidge Bereaux shouted, “Yuh singing for your supper.” She quickly countered that she wondered how many people on that (PNM)  side were singing for their supper.