ARCHIE MAKES MISTAKE

Archie is now saying, “no such decision was made”.

The reversal in position was contained in a letter by the attorney representing the Chief Justice to former attorney general Anand Ramlogan, SC, who is representing a minor before the courts on a murder charge and whose case was affected by Ayers-Caesar’s appointment as a judge of the High Court.

Ramlogan on June 12, wrote to attorney Ian Roach who represents Archie, seeking answers on the consensus arrived at a meeting of stakeholders on May 24, when it was reported these stakeholders agreed to have all 53 cases restarted de novo (new trial). However, in his letter to Ramlogan dated June 20, Roach said, “Your letter proceeds on a wholly erroneous premise. My instructions are that no such decision was made in your letter.” On May 25, a release by the Judiciary’s Court Protocol and Information Manager Alicia Carter- Fisher, announced that a decision was made at the stakeholders meeting of May 24. In the release, Carter-Fisher said, “consensus was reached and the meeting agreed to have all 53 matters restarted de novo.” It was also announced that Ag Chief Magistrate Maria Busby-Earle Caddle would preside over all indictable cases, while all summary matters will be taken over by an assigned magistrate at the Port of Spain Magistrates’ Court. All other Eighth Court matters which were not started will be managed by the acting deputy chief magistrate, the statement further noted.

RELEASE NOT WORDED PROPERLY The Judiciary statement said priority will be given to the 53 matters which will be actively case-managed using the new Criminal Procedure Rules (CPR) of 2016, “having regard to the hardships already experienced by the incarcerated, accused on bail, victims, witnesses and other stakeholders within the system.” Present at the May 24 meeting were CJ Archie, Director of Public Prosecutions Roger Gaspard, SC, Law Association vice president Rajiv Persad, members of the Criminal Bar Association, the acting chief magistrate, senior magistrates and the Registrar of the Supreme Court. It was convened to “determine the way forward for the 53 part-heard matters left unresolved by Ayers-Caesar”, the Judiciary release stated.

However, in his June 20 letter to Ramlogan, Roach said that Carter- Fisher’s media release which carried the Judiciary’s seal, was not properly worded. “It is unfortunate that you have construed the media release (which was regrettably not worded as it should have been) in the way that you have,” Roach told Ramlogan. “The purpose of the meeting was simply to obtain the views of the persons in attendance, not to make a decision as to how the matters would or should be dealt with the relevant presiding magistrate.” The announcement by the Judiciary on May 25, of a consensus arrived at, came almost a month after Ayers-Caesar resigned (on April 27) as a judge, when it was revealed by the Chief Justice that she misrepresented the number of cases left unresolved before her move to the High Court.

It also occurred a week before the Law Association debated and passed a motion of no confidence in Archie and other members of the Judicial and Legal Services Commission (JLSC) over the bungling of Ayers-Caesar’s appointment.

The controversy deepened when on June 1, at least 40 of the 53 part-heard cases was called before the Ag Chief Magistrate in the Port of Spain Eighth Magistrates’ Court.

‘I HAVE MY INSTRUCTIONS’ Earle-Caddle told attorneys, which included the DPP, that she had her instructions to restart the matters. “I can’t answer that question...

I am not in charge of the JLSC,” she said. “I have my instructions to restart the matters,” she said.

She was responding to questions from Gaspard and other attorneys on the status of Ayers-Caesar given that the Judiciary issued a previous statement which said Ayers-Caesar had been restored as chief magistrate. Automobiliai, baldai, langai, buhalterija, seo, paskolos, reklama, remontas, kreditai internetu ir kiti strapsniai portale straipsniai.org

As she apologised to each prisoner, Earle-Caddle told them that the magistrate who started the matter was no longer “with us” and it was the law that the cases must be restarted.

She also disclosed that she was informed that Ayers-Caesar had vacated the office of chief magistrate and that she was given the directive on Wednesday (May 31) that the part-heard matters were to be restarted. Earle-Caddle did not say from whom she received the directive. “I am sorry I have tried to assist you. I cannot assist you any further,” she said.

She did disclosed that no decision to restart the cases de novo was taken at the stakeholders meeting. In his letter to Ramlogan, Roach also indicated that “no further directives were issued to any judicial officer as to how they should deal with the matters which may come before them.” He also told Ramlogan that “no person or persons arrogated unto themselves the power to determine the future conduct” of his client’s case.

“Your client’s legal representative is free to make any representations or submissions he considers appropriate before the presiding magistrate and have same dealt with at that time. That is the protection of the law and the right to a fair hearing that the Constitution guarantees to your client,” Roach further advised Ramlogan. Several of the affected part-heard cases are expected to be called next Tuesday.