In keeping with its general policy and so as not to prejudice or give the appearance of prejudicing the outcome of any investigation, and out of respect for the judiciary, the DBA has to date refrained from engaging in public discourse regarding the above-mentioned matters, instead allowing the investigative process to take its course.<\/p>\n
However, in the light of recent sustained and regrettable misleading and incorrect media comment, not least by Lay Magistrate, Tiyani Behanzin himself, the DBA is, in this instance, impelled to make some, albeit limited, public comment.\u00a0 Silence, in all the circumstances, is most definitely not in the best interests of justice, respect for the maintenance and integrity of the judicial system and law and order itself.<\/p>\n
The primary purpose of this press conference is to absolutely refute and correct a number of flagrant and repeated inaccuracies, misrepresentations and untruths being disseminated through the airwaves and media generally over recent days and weeks.\u00a0 It is not intended nor will this conference address in detail the specifics of the written and other complaints made regarding Lay Magistrate Behanzin.\u00a0 These will be addressed at an appropriate alternative time and forum.<\/p>\n
As you will doubtless be aware, over the year since the appointment of Lay Magistrate Behanzin, considerable controversy has surrounded the magistracy in Dominica.\u00a0 Further, the JLSC of the ECSC has established an Inquiry to investigate reports regarding the conduct of Lay Magistrate Behanzin and that Inquiry convened for the first time on Monday 22nd March 2010, but was adjourned sine die, the following day, Tuesday 23rd March 2010.\u00a0 Not a evidence was heard.<\/p>\n
In the days immediately prior and subsequent to that Inquiry Lay Magistrate Behanzin made a number of misleading, inflammatory and\/or incorrect claims on various talk shows and through other media outlets which in no particular order of importance, the DBA categorically refute.<\/p>\n
Firstly, the DBA categorically refutes Lay Magistrate Behanzin’s claims that the complaints now before the JLSC Inquiry are essentially by disgruntled lawyers unhappy about so-called tough or harsh sentences he has imposed upon criminals in order to protect the public.\u00a0 Absolutely none, not a single one, of the written complaints made by lawyers and now before the Inquiry is in relation to any such sentence, harsh or otherwise.<\/p>\n
All lawyers are well aware that the appropriate route for challenging a sentence is through the Court of Appeal and not a letter of complaint.\u00a0 Indeed, several appeals against sentences passed by Lay Magistrate Behanzin are due to be heard before the Court of Appeal this coming month (i.e. April).<\/p>\n
What is more though is that at the time Lay Magistrate Behanzin made those claims, he was fully aware of these facts.
\nSecondly, the DBA categorically refutes Lay Magistrate Behanzin’s claims and\/or suggestions that the lawyers and others who have made complainants regarding his improper conduct inside and outside the court are sympathisers and apologists for criminals and in some way the cause and are desirous of increased of crime in our society. Again Lay Magistrate Behanzin knew or ought to have known that his statement was simply incorrect.<\/p>\n
Indeed, nothing can be further from the truth.\u00a0 It is well recognised by all lawyers who after all are part of the community and are victims too, that crime is a scourge on our society as indeed it is on all free-world societies.\u00a0 Crime cannot and will not however, be curbed by the unlawful conduct of officials charged with the responsibility of enforcing the law, be they magistrates of others, but rather through a clear and assiduous respect for and adherence to the principle of the rule of law.<\/p>\n
Lawyers play a vital role in maintaining this or indeed any other democratic society.\u00a0 Lawyers are charged with an onerous responsibility, often overlooked, even disregarded by many, to fearlessly represent their clients and test the evidence being placed before the Court, even where their client may be accused of some heinous crime.\u00a0 The true strength of a democratic society perhaps lies in the fairness with which it treats the least cherished of its citizens.<\/p>\n
Thirdly, the DBA wishes to make it absolutely clear that it utterly and completely refutes the wilful, some might say malicious, allegations made by Lay Magistrate Behan , to the effect that the DBA is and\/or has been engaged in a dishonest and concerted conspiracy to remove him from the Bench.\u00a0 These allegations made by Lay Magistrate Behan in are, without an iota of merit or a scintilla of credible evidential support.\u00a0 The claims are utterly baseless and wholly untrue.\u00a0 What is however true, is that some lawyers, in keeping with their responsibilities as officers of the Court and with a view to maintaining the integrity of the justice system have sacrificed the time, effort and safety of anonymity to bring the spotlight to bear upon wrong doing.<\/p>\n
Similarly, the Lay Magistrate’s allegations that there is some grand coalition of conspiracy against him, encompassing the Inquiry and presumably the JLSC, by what he terms “the Elites”, and that this conspiracy is directed at him because he is standing up for the “small man” is baseless.\u00a0 Further, such a claim rings exceedingly hollow when one considers that it was, presumably, those same “Elites” who (i) appointed Lay Magistrate Behanzin to the magistracy in contravention of the established policy of only appointing professional lawyers as magistrates, (ii) did not rush to convene the Inquiry: there has been a delay of some 8 months between the Ministry of Legal Affairs referral letter of July 2009, and the establishment by the JLSC of the Inquiry, and (iii) permitted a further delay by way of adjournment of the Inquiry.\u00a0 Though a mere sample, these do not suggest to any but the most blinkered any conspiracy or bias against Lay Magistrate Behanzin.<\/p>\n
In conclusion, the DBA wishes to make the following brief points: Firstly, that the media has a duty to exercise a perhaps greater degree of journalistic responsibility in dealing with this whole matter than it has managed to date.<\/p>\n
Whilst the temptation presented to any media outlet by a ready stream of allegations and innuendo from a sitting magistrate is understandable, it seems to the DBA that in any society, but particularly a small society such as ours, that a heavy responsibility rests upon the media to ensure that it is receiving and conveying to its audience the most accurate information reasonably possible.\u00a0 Thus far the media generally has made insufficient effort to obtain such fullest information or to vigorously test the information such as it has.<\/p>\n
Secondly, the DBA trusts that henceforth journalists will be somewhat more forensic in their journalistic encounters, should Lay Magistrate Behanzin or any other judicial officer prove incapable of resisting the urge to pursue publicity, and the media to maintaining that regrettable public spectacle (probably unique to Dominica) of a sitting magistrate or judicial officer relentlessly courting the various media houses.<\/p>\n
Finally, the DBA is of the view that this continuing saga is detrimental to and is undermining the justice system as a whole.\u00a0 Accordingly, the\u00a0 DBA is expects that the JLSC will rapidly reconvene the Inquiry and bring this matter to a speedy close whatever the outcome may be.<\/p>\n
Further, in spite of the fact that this matter has been brought to the attention of the public, the Dominica Bar Association wishes to remind and advise the public that Mr. Behanzin is a sitting magistrate, to whom the public must continue to give the utmost respect as deserving of his office.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"In keeping with its general policy and so as not to prejudice or give the appearance of prejudicing the outcome of any investigation, and out of respect for the judiciary, the DBA has to date refrained from engaging in public…","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_cbd_carousel_blocks":"[]","footnotes":""},"categories":[19],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7065","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-crime-court-law"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n