Panday goes on trial Thursday

British Queen’s Counsel Sir Timothy Cassel said the defence was continuously delaying the case from starting and called on the court to begin the summary trial.

Chief Magistrate Sherman Mc Nicolls agreed with the prosecution and called for the case to start. But the defence pleaded for more time to make further submissions. That will take place on Thursday.

Panday, Leader of the Opposition, was charged by Assistant Commissioner Wellington Virgil on September 18, 2002, with failing to declare to the Integrity Commission his London bank accounts for 1997, 1998, and 1999, in accordance with the Integrity in Public Life Act 2000.

When the case was called in the Port-of-Spain Eighth Magistrates’ Court yesterday, Desmond Allum SC, Fyard Hosein SC, and Devesh Maharaj appeared for Panday. Missing was Allan Alexander SC. Cassel and senior State attorney Wayne Rajbansie appeared for the prosecution.

When the matter was called, Allum sought an adjournment, saying that a petition seeking leave was filed only on Friday to the Privy Council. Panday is appealing the decision of the Court of Appeal to dismiss his constitutional motion relating to the proceedings in the Magistrates’ Court.

Allum indicated that a date will be set in the Privy Council within the next two weeks.

But Cassel was not accepting this sitting down. He pointed out that the defence filed the petition on the very last working day before the start of the summary trial. "This is one more ploy to delay the hearing of this case. We have been willing to proceed since the eighth of April 2003. It is abundantly clear that this has been a case of delaying tactics by the defence from the beginning to the end."

Cassel said the charges were laid against Panday on September 18, 2002. He said Panday appeared in court on November 29, 2002, where he pleaded not guilty. It was put to February 24, 2003, where it was agreed that the case would begin on April 9, 2003.

On that day, the defence raised certain constitutional points which were subsequently referred to the High Court by the Chief Magistrate. It was not until September 16, 2003, that the originating motion was filed in the High Court.

The High Court dismissed the motion on February 24, 2004. Three days before the matter was due to come before Mc Nicolls, the defence filed grounds of appeal with the Court of Appeal.

"It is a pattern which the defence have been using," Cassel told the court.

Cassel said that on March 22, 2004, the defence informed the court that it was appealing the matter. The Court of Appeal, he added, eventually dismissed the appeal.

The prosecutor said that on May 16, 2005, the defence indicated to Mc Nicolls that they had filed a petition with the Court of Appeal seeking to appeal to the Privy Council. "It was a rather long time for the defence to file an application for an appeal. That was deliberate delaying tactics," Cassel added.

Cassel said the Court of Appeal dismissed the application on September 19, 2005, and the case returned to Mc Nicolls on October 24. "You were told that the defence were applying to the Privy Council for leave to petition, and that they received advice from counsel in England. You (Mc Nicolls) gave more time to them to file the application and we agreed to adjourn to the 15th of December."

Cassel said that on that day, the defence told the court that they had retained an attorney in England to petition the Privy Council. He said the matter was fixed for trial to start yesterday. He pointed out that the defence took four and a half months to file the petition to the Privy Council. He then asked the court to reject the application and proceed with the trial.

In reply, Allum said the defence was not to be blamed, but instead, criticism must be made of the administration of justice in this country.

He pointed out that magistrates were working under onerous conditions while others were operating within luxury surroundings in the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). Mc Nicolls rejected the application for a further adjournment. Allum then asked for a short adjournment so that Allan Alexander SC could make a preliminary submission. Mc Nicolls agreed and adjourned hearing to Thursday.

Cassel indicated that he has witnesses coming from England to testify for the prosecution and he expects that the prosecution’s case can be closed next week.