While admitting that he is not in a position to determine the duration of the judicial review cases, Attorney General Levi Peter said he is optimistic that the process in one involving five police officers will be done in a timely fashion.
Peter made the remarks at a press conference held at the Government Information Service (GIS) office in Bath Estate on Thursday.
“What I can guarantee is that I, as Attorney General, will do everything in our power to progress the matter as quickly as possible,” he said. “So far it appears that we can be optimistic in terms of the speed within which the matter was first considered, when it came before the court on the 19th and the speed with which the judge gave his decision…”
He hopes the process will continue in such a speedy manner.
“So I would anticipate that we will continue that way,” he pointed out, adding that all parties on the state’s side will “ensure that we keep a close eye on trying to expedite the matter.”
“But it’s a fair concern … I am sufficiently confident that we should be able to keep it reasonably on track,” Peter said.
Peter also mentioned that there have been several calls by both the public and media on what a judicial review really is.
“There is clearly the need for some clarification as to what is meant by judicial review and how it relates to the criminal proceedings that were to proceed before the magistrate’s court and then further on if appropriate,” he said.
In his explanation, he stated that a judicial review, as the words imply, is not an appeal decision but a review of the manner in which the decision was made.
“Judicial review is concerned not with the decision, but with the decision making process, that is one concept of it,” he explained. “The function of the high court on an application for judicial review is limited to determining whether or not the impugned decision was legal, not whether or not it was correct. What really is under review or consideration is not the decision itself in judicial review, but the manner or the process.”
He said when the judge hands down his decision on the matter, a time table was set down for its progression.
In his explanation, Peter said the applicants have to file their claim within 14 days of the judge’s decision and within 10 days of being served with that claim, the state has to file affidavits in reply.
The first hearing in the matter is set for September 24, 2014.
“So it’s quite a tight time table and from there we will see how we proceed,” the attorney general said. “But it is important that people understand, and some of the comments that I have heard are misplaced, that the decision in respect to judicial review is not a decision that the criminal proceedings can or cannot proceed. The two are separate.”
“Judicial review is simply a judgement consideration to the correctness of the process and not the decision,” Peter explained.
The five police officers are facing charges in relation to the death of a Picard man, Joshua Etienne.
He was found dead in his cell but charges could not be read to the officers since their attorney had filed for a leave for judicial review which was granted by a high court judge.
The AG needs to explain Section 30 of the Coroner’s Act because i believe he lacks clarity in defining this section when it comes to the Coroners Position in this section.
And it states: Section 30 of the Act
No Counsel or solicitor shall be entitled as of right to appear before any proceedings before a Coroner’s Court.But the Coroner may,if he thinks fit, on application,permit such application.
Some people understand parables better than theory. You are a captain of a ship and you get a may day warning abandon ship,the last person to leave is the captain.Here the first to abandoned was the captain.Would you sail with him? Get him on the witness stand or abandon the case. Send the culprits to Antigua. Fair is fair you never turn your back on a work mates for it might be you next.Shame if he had backed his police officers it wouldn’t have gone so far
Mr Peters, as the AG of Dominica, i am quite sure that you are aware of the fact that a Portsmouth man name DRIGO was murdered at sunrise in the presence of other Portsmouth police, and as of this day no one has been brought to justice. So do you honestly think that these five will ever be prosecuted by you or any one else? ( the lawless country)
“What I can guarantee is that I, as Attorney General, will do everything in our power to progress the matter as quickly as possible,”.
“What “I” can guarantee is that “”I”, as Attorney General”, will do everything in “our” power to progress the matter as quickly as possible,”
Levi is saying “I” (he) will do everything in “OUR”, but when Lennox said “ministers” he is sued.
What does Levi mean by “OUR?” Who is OUR? OUR and I are NOT the same.
Aye Las so we come de AG supporting murder.
DNO its disappointing that when people ask for the lawyers to give their views on matters and when they do their views are not being published.
Peter’s Law on Q has already informed us what a judicial review is and how and why it is raised and under what circumstances can leave be granted and ultimately under which circumstances one can be successful with such an application at the High Court,
Judicial review is a procedure in English administrative law by which the courts supervise the exercise of public power on the application of an individual. A person who feels that an exercise of such power by a government authority, such as a minister, the local council or a statutory tribunal, is unlawful, perhaps because it has violated his or her rights, may apply to the Administrative Court (a division of the High Court) for judicial review of the decision and have it set aside (quashed) and possibly obtain damages. A court may also make mandatory orders or injunctions to compel the authority to do its duty or to stop it from acting illegally. Did I read that right…. Set aside (quashed) and possibly obtain damages!!!
Whether it is a government employee or member of the public the judge is seeking the truth in order to pass justice.In a murder trial any unreasonable doubt the prisoner goes free.Any one with useful information pass it on. By the way there will still be policemen. We are not going to lose these 4
The police did not kill nobody they merely arrested an offender
@Efficatious, WHO KILLED THE MAN? How did the deceased incur his injuries? Are these type of INJURIES sustained by a MERE ARREST?
What is a judgement consideration to the correctness of the procedures.
Senior Counsel Lang Mama’response: in other words the justice system if messed up. The legal professional services do not understand basic procedures. A man taken into the police station in perfect condition and comes out massacred, mangled and dead. To Law enforcement and the justice system it is mysterious. In fact there is no explanation.
Senior Counsel Lang Mama thereby recommend another silly explanation by someone like Charles Saverin who explained to us the mystery of the St Kitts gun man. Calling Charlo
From understanding the AG explanation of a judicial review is another way of saying the decision is wrong or illegal.
Why this man insists on commenting so much on the case is beyond me. It would seem that he may be trying to muddy the water and give defense counsel cause for dismissing on technicalities.
there’s a need for judicial review for the judicial review…
Is that the BEST we can have for an attorney general…..
@!!!!, I think the Attorney General has NO IDEA of what he is talking about. Never heard such talk.
Judicial review my foot! In Dominica’s case that technicality is being used to frustrate the rightful course of justice, to prevent alleged perpetrators from being questioned in court and witness from being heard. It is a disgrace.
@Jojo, the police is PROTECTING the police. There is NO LAW for VICTIMS. This is a SHAME.
How long has the judicial review in the case of Emanuel against Isidore taken so far? Can the learned A G give any indication as too whenvwecwill see some action there?
Hmmm, mister have guts. How many years we waiting on the Emmanuel case again?
Speedy my foot.
Well the judicial review can take a whole year. It really does not matter. The most high Jesus Christ is the Judge, Jury and prosecutor. He knows the truth, he knows what happened that night. The good thing is he always judges right, without fear or prejudice. You may excape from man, but you cannot escape from God. AMEN
Yup. You can RUN but you cannot HIDE.
The AG reminds me of the “Hey Diddle Diddle” Rhyme. Frankly it is easier for me to believe “The Cow Jumped Over the Moon” than to believe what this AG says. I think this AG is not even qualified to work in traffic as a corp.
Stop playing with words…..if the process is wrong then it only make sense that the decision is wrong
You have said nothing to appeal to the family of the victim nor to allay the anxieties of the general public……no sensitivity
Monkey brain, cant you understand, what do you want Levi to do, what the hell must he do again to satisfy the family? the judge grant leave for a judicial review monkey, what the hell must Levi do, play judge and jury and try and convict the officers himself? cheeeeeeeze, bunch of smart @$$e$ in Dominica.
In that case it would be better for him to stay silent rather than wring his hands like Pontius Pilate. How can we have respect for an A.G. like that?
From merely a layman’s point of view, the decision of the High Court to hear and rule on the application is confounding. In every legal jurisdiction we know of, the high court is typically asked to review the process or procedures allowed during trial conducted under the auspices of a lower court. The high court conducts such reviews after, and only after, a decision has been rendered after trial is complete and an appeal is made to the high court challenging the process allowed by the lower court and that led to a conviction or acquittal.
In short, it seems to me that the trial process process must run its course before the court officials could ever request judicial review. To do otherwise seems an attempt to short circuit justice.
Thats what you all want in the country , so dont come and wash your mouth abd hands like you are (all) so concern. First to begin, why did you all send the supreme lawyer to block the proceding. You have fail and the people of Dominica are seeing that your govt fail also.
Mr. Lawrence now is your chance they have categorically accepted that mistakes have been made including the autopsy.Get them on the witness stand one by one. In order for the police to arrest a criminal he must touch him. Have they produce the murder weapon.
The question is NOT “Have they produced the murder weapon?” It should be, have they produced the ammunition that the VICTIM was ARRESTED for?
Further, YOU do NOT need a “murder weapon” YOU have a “VICTIM.” HOW DID HE DIE? He certainly did NOT commit suicide.
A police boot can be a murder weapon, even a fist!
I think this Judicial review thing is a good thing. Too often those in power do what they like when they like without any review of the process. It seems to me that Wiltshire should have sought a review of the process which determined the case against him (the passport issue) be pursued even after it was thrown out.
The only problem is you do not have any power or control over the government and its operatives to dictate the pace of anything they are involved in.
This guy looks distressed in this picture? I wonder why? Maybe because he has lost all respect.
It is only a picture. Some pictures do not reveal a good face. It depends on the angle the picture was taken. After all he did not pose in front of the camera. Otherwise the picture would look differently. This pertains to everyone. Surely you should know that.
@ The Facts August 28, 2014;
Yes but a picture is worth a thousand words Mr.
Another lecture is not needed. Thanks
Thanks for the clarification AG on “judicial Review”. That however does not eradicate from my mind the attempts to delay, frustrate or even avoid at any cost, the police officers facing trial for their actions or inaction on that fateful night in Portsmouth involving a human being. up to now the officers are yet to be charged. A complaint was made against them – that is all. They can abscond from the territory, because there is no bail amount. No ones property will be lost if they fail to appear. And guess what? They do not ever have to return tot he territory. All they have to do is to seek haven in a British or European jurisdiction and seek asylum for fear of facing the death penalty if convicted. That is it. Remember the gentleman who never faced his day in court because A British judge felt that the French prisons were unfit for the incarceration of people charged with committing drug running crimes? Imagine a charge of murder in a jurisdiction where the death penalty is still on the statute books.
smart @$$, didnt you hear that the five officers was charged for murder, you dumb or something man, why dominicans always have to make themselves a moomoos, o lord man.
The officers were charged? What are the bail conditions? Stay at police headquarters during the day and go home under the cover of darkness only to return before dawn the next day? Walk up and down police headquarters laughing and socializing with their friends? What is preventing the police from escaping knowing full well they have not encumbered anybody’s property as bail?. You think facing a murder charge is easy? Does the police’s paper work alone amount to a charge of murder or for the charge to be official, it has to go through the process of registering in court, suspect appearing in court where the charge is read, a plea or silence is recorded, a bail application is made and or denied and then you can say that one are charged with murder?
“Judicial review is simply a judgement consideration to the correctness of the process and not the decision,” Peter explained.
OK! my understanding here is this; if the process was wrong, then the decision emanating from the process ought also to be wrong. There is need for more explanation. Please have the AG explain this so that the lay man can understand.