![\"\"](\"https:\/\/dominicanewsonline.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/NJAM-logo-642x429.png\"){kind=logo}
The executive of NJAM [National Joint Action Movement] unequivocally condemns the cynical, capricious and contemptuous attempt of attorney Lennox Lawrence, counsel for the Prime Minister, to improperly influence the DPP to discontinue the private prosecution brought against the Prime Minister and some of his Cabinet colleagues for the offence of treating.<\/p>\n
It is indeed shocking that despite the decision of the Caribbean Court of Justice ordering the Chief Magistrate to appoint a magistrate to hear the case against the Prime Minister and others, and section 72(6) of the Constitution which expressly states that in deciding whether or not to continue or discontinue a private prosecution, the DPP must rely on his or her own independent judgment, subject only to advice from the Attorney General, a senior lawyer would seek to persuade the DPP to protect the Prime Minister from being held accountable for his actions.<\/p>\n
Make no mistake, this is a shameless attempt to grant the Prime Minister carte blanche immunity from prosecution for alleged illegal activity. Mr. Lawrence seeks to justify his inexcusable conduct on a number of dubious grounds,
\nincluding the delay in the case and the fact that the case is simply too complex and significant to be handled by private prosecutors in the magistrate court.<\/p>\n
These arguments have no merit. First, the delay in the case was largely the result of the High Court judge taking all of three years to render a decision in a case which can charitably be described as being moderately complex. Second, Mr. Lawrence has shown a woeful ignorance of the jurisprudence and scholarly literature concerning private prosecutions. Indeed, in a 2009 case of the OECS Court of Appeal, no less a jurist than the current Chief Justice, Perreira J.A., stated the following in a dissenting opinion:<\/p>\n
The retention of the right of a private person to bring a criminal prosecution is an important safety net where those vested with the authority to bring and conduct a criminal prosecution decline to do so without just case. <\/em><\/p>\n In the very same decision, Baptiste J.A. stated that:<\/p>\n A decision to prosecute or not to prosecute should not be informed by political considerations or other undue or improper influence or pressure.<\/em><\/p>\n In the 1975 case of Gouriet v. Union of Post Office (1975) AC 435, Lord Wilberforce had this to say about private prosecutions:<\/p>\n The individual in such situations, who wishes to see the law enforced has a remedy of his own: he can bring a private prosecution. This historical right which goes right back to the earliest days of our legal system\u2026remains a valuable constitutional safeguard against inertia or partiality on the part of authority.<\/em><\/p>\n Lord Diplock went even further in the same case. He stated that private prosecutions are \u201ca useful constitutional safeguard against capricious, corrupt or biased failure or refusal of those authorities to prosecute offenders against the criminal law.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n Nowhere are the observations of Lords Wilberforce and Diplock more relevant than they are in Dominica.<\/p>\n We have seen private attempts by a former Chief Magistrate to lay criminal charges against counsel for the Prime Minister flushed down the legal drain. We have seen attempts to ensure that the Prime Minister is in compliance Private prosecutions constitute an indispensable tool to be utilized by citizens to ensure that no one is above the law or should violate the law with virtual impunity.<\/p>\n In its ability to do so, private prosecutions have a distinguished provenance in Dominica. For example, in September 1978, Curtis Toussaint, represented by attorney Brian Alleyne (as he was then), filed a private criminal complaint against Roma Harris of the Electoral Office for \u201cunlawfully omitting to register a qualified elector\u201d when he sought to register to vote on September 14, 1978. Harris eventually pled guilty. Chief Magistrate Sylvia Bertrand fined Harris $500, disqualified her from voting for seven years and had her salary as a registering officer forfeited. A government minister, Luke Corriette, pardoned her a few weeks later.<\/p>\n It is a sad day indeed when counsel for the Prime Minister, whose sworn duty is to uphold the law, would seek to undermine and emasculate it with this letter directed to the DPP. Worse, it is a dark day when some Dominicans, with their silence, condone and countenance this despicable behaviour.<\/p>\n We, in NJAM, stand united in our resolution to fight this flagrant abuse of power with every fibre of our being.<\/p>\n NJAM<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The executive of NJAM [National Joint Action Movement] unequivocally condemns the cynical, capricious and contemptuous attempt of attorney Lennox Lawrence, counsel for the Prime Minister, to improperly influence the DPP to discontinue the private prosecution brought against the Prime Minister…","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":259807,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_cbd_carousel_blocks":"[]","footnotes":""},"categories":[19,11,235,9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-265500","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-crime-court-law","category-general","category-homepage-carousel","category-news"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n
\nwith legislation concerning the declaration of his assets aborted and stopped dead in their tracks. We have seen the illegal diversion of public monies from the Consolidated Fund without a whimper of protest, let alone prosecution, from the Office of the DPP.<\/p>\n