BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – ATTORNEY-GENERAL the Hon. Vincent Byron Jr. has outlined the chief reason for initiating settlement talks between the Government of St. Christopher and Nevis and former Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Travers Sinanan to dispose of a civil suit that the latter had brought against the former.
The matter was laid to rest yesterday (Sept. 21) with both sides “amicably” agreeing to the terms and conditions of the settlement which included a confidentiality agreement.
Sinanan, who had served as DPP for two years up until July, 2015, challenged the Government’s decision to forego renewing his contract while the Government had maintained that it acted lawfully.
Speaking with the media after the Court was informed of the settlement, AG Byron explained that it was necessary to initiate settlement talks “for one primary reason, and that is the need to bring certainty to the administration of justice and, in particular, the Criminal Justice System”.
He advised that with only four matters being disposed of during the last Assizes in St. Kitts, 32 were traversed. And for the upcoming Assizes which begins today (Sept. 22), 16 new cases have been added.
He said the Government understood the need to “bring certainty to the start of the September Assizes”, and while the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions is prepared to advance with those cases, plans are moving swiftly to have an acting DPP appointed while measures are taken to have the post filled permanently.
“And so tomorrow (today), the Assizes are scheduled to begin, we are ready to proceed. We now have to engage quickly, and we will today get it confirmed through the Judicial and Legal Services Commission an acting DPP so that we can properly advertise throughout the region, not just in St. Kitts, but throughout the region, to bring a top DPP to the office so that we can move forward to resolve, as it is, the situation in our justice system.”
One of Sinanan’s lawyers, Sylvester Anthony, told the media that while they felt there were important issues which the Court needed to address, counsel was duty-bound to, once possible, resolve the matter out-of-court.
“While we thought it was important for us to bring the proceedings in order for us to address the serious issues which arose, as lawyers, we think we also had a duty and a responsibility, if it were possible, to resolve it without court proceedings, that we should make a very serious attempt to do so. And we’ve done that. It’s not been very easy but we have been able to succeed in arriving at a resolution that is satisfactory to both parties.
“The issues that arise in this case are very serious issues and, of course, there are egos involved as well. So it’s always difficult when you are negotiating serious issues and it has taken us some time, but at the end of the day we are very pleased that we are where we are.”
