{"id":331416,"date":"2024-10-22T18:49:47","date_gmt":"2024-10-22T22:49:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dominicanewsonline.com\/news\/?p=331416"},"modified":"2024-10-22T18:49:47","modified_gmt":"2024-10-22T22:49:47","slug":"high-court-judge-rules-against-claimants-in-2018-case-against-attorney-general-and-then-police-chief","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dominicanewsonline.com\/news\/homepage\/homepage-carousel\/high-court-judge-rules-against-claimants-in-2018-case-against-attorney-general-and-then-police-chief\/","title":{"rendered":"High Court Judge rules against claimants in 2018 case against attorney general and then police chief"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
Riot police at scene of protest in December 2018<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Dominican agronomist, environmentalist and social activist, Atherton \u201cAthie\u201d Martin, Former President of the Concerned Citizens Movement (CCM) Loftus Durand, and James Daisy have lost a recent court battle against former Chief of Police Daniel Carbon and Attorney General Levi Peter during a recent high court matter.<\/p>\n

The matter was brought before the high court in Roseau in 2018 following protest actions which took place on Castle Street in Roseau organized by the CCM on Saturday, December 15, 2018. \u00a0Riot police were called to disperse protesters at the event after the growing crowd blocked the road.<\/p>\n

The meeting had been called to address the much-talked-about Electoral Reform. The CCM had been engaged in several activities to advocate for free and fair elections and good governance. The meeting was brought to an end sometime after 4:00 PM that day when members of the riot squad intervened.<\/p>\n

According to information from the high court proceedings by High Court Judge Colin Williams, the three complainants, Martin, Durand and Daisy claimed that they were affected by the tear gas. The claimants jointly said that the police were unlawful, they suffered injury and loss as a consequence of the action of the police, and they are entitled to damages as a result of the action by the police.<\/p>\n

The court information further stated that the defendants disagreed that the steps taken by the police were unreasonable or gave rise to any cause of action by the claimant. The information also indicated that before the CCM held the public meeting, there was no communication between the organisers and the police.\u00a0 However, the claimants contend that no permission was required to hold a meeting.<\/p>\n

Daisy said that apart from being personally affected by the tear gas, one of the tear gas canisters damaged his vehicle\u2019s windscreen. Meanwhile, State Attorney in the Chambers of the Attorney General, Jason Lawrence who was addressing a press briefing recently said that during the trial evidence was presented which included witness testimonies from both sides.<\/p>\n

\u201cAt the trial, the claimant, Mr Loftus Durand, Atherton Martin and James Daisy were represented by Cara Shillingford and the defendants, the attorney general and the chief of police were represented by Miss Nadira Lando and myself\u2026,\u201d he explained. \u201cIn his judgement, the Honourable Justice Colin Williams stated that the purpose of Dominica\u2019s public order is to make provisions for the preservation of public order on the occasion of public profession and meetings in public places.\u201d<\/p>\n

He continued, \u201cThe Honourable Justice Colin Williams found the CCM\u2019s meeting was a pop procession under the Public Order Act and did require a permit which the CCM failed to request or obtain. As a result, Justice Williams found that the assembly was unlawful.\u201d<\/p>\n

In his judgement, Justice Williams said the claimants had failed to prove that they were entitled to any damages whether exemplary, aggravated or special, or costs, interest, or any other relief. He stated that their claim has failed entirely.<\/p>\n

Lawrence added that the judge found that whether the use of tear gas was justified had to be evaluated considering all the surrounding factors.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Honourable Justice Colin Williams found that the police acted reasonably given the size of the crowd, the disruption to traffic and the agitation caused by Mr Atherton Martin\u2019s call to block the road,\u201d he remarked. \u201cJustice Williams concluded that the police\u2019s response was appropriate and was not excessive, because they acted reasonably as their interventions were based on escalating tensions and the need to prevent disorder.\u201d<\/p>\n

Moreover, he added that Justice Williams found that there was no breach of the constitutional rights of the claimants.<\/p>\n

\u201cAs a result, the court dismissed the claimant\u2019s case entirely and ordered the claimants to pay costs to the defendants,\u201d Lawrence explained.<\/p>\n

The claimants, Martin, Durand and Daisy were ordered to pay within twenty-one (21) days, one-third of the respondents’ costs.\u00a0 That is over $3000.<\/p>\n

\u00a0A full version of this case can be found on\u00a0ecccourt.org<\/a> .\u00a0Loftus Durand v Attorney-General Of The Commonwealth Of Dominica<\/a><\/p>\n