BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – CONTEMPT of Court hearings against Attorney General Hon. Dr. Dennis Merchant and Hon. Cedric Liburd began yesterday (Jul. 28), and a ruling relating to the matter is expected to be delivered this morning (Jul. 29) by Her Ladyship Justice Rita Joseph-Olivetti.
A five-hour debate ensued yesterday after the decision by the High Court to dismiss applications made by the respondents to strike out the Contempt of Court hearings. Justice Joseph-Olivetti deemed that the case should not be “muted prematurely”.
Early in the hearing, discussions were held about audio and a transcript of statements claimed to have been made by the Prime Minister Hon. Dr. Denzil Douglas in Parliament. The respondents subsequently requested time to ascertain the authenticity of the new evidence. The People’s Action Movment’s (PAM) legal counsel informed the court that if the recording and its attached transcript are not allowed as evidence, the team would request the Prime Minister to be cross-examined in Court.
Counsel representing PAM, Leslie Haynes QC, requested on behalf of the claimant that AG Merchant and Liburd be held in contempt of court, be censured and be reprimanded. He claimed that the AG failed to advise the Prime Minister that the injunction bars any use of the report from the Constituency Boundaries Commission (CBC).
“[Merchant] aided and abetted in the laying of the report in the National Assembly. He failed to object to the approval of the resolution which was in breach of the injunction,” he stated.
Haynes referred to an affidavit filed by the claimant, Hon. Shawn Richards of PAM, stating that the agenda for the emergency sitting of Parliament had only one item for discussion, which was a motion on a draft proclamation giving effect to recommendations made in the report. He affirmed his claim that Merchant should have advised Parliament not to make reference to the CBC report in order to not “be in violation of the injunction”.
In the case of Liburd, the claimants viewed that as a member of the CBC he also went against the standing injunction by his presence in Parliament at the time that the report was being debated.
“Hon. Cedric Liburd very well knew that an order restraining the laying in Parliament of the report stood, and that his presence and support of the resolution should be admissible evidence of him aiding and abetting the use of the report,” Haynes argued.
Counsel for the respondents Dr. Henry Browne mounted a quick defence, and informed the Court that any mention of statements or actions made in Parliament are inadmissible to the hearing. He contended that such reflection on statements and actions of parliamentarians are outlawed as evidence under the provisions of the National Assembly Powers and Privileges Act, which he claimed gives Parliamentary officials immunity.
In the latter part of the proceedings, while the claimants continued to make references to statements made in Parliament, counsel for the respondents Sylvester Anthony requested for a ruling to be made on whether such statements can be admitted as evidence, considering that parliamentarians enjoy a measure of immunity.
PAM’s Counsel Haynes countered that, even outside of Parliament, the AG’s “failure to advise the PM” indicates he was aiding and abetting the use of the report. He referenced a special case in St. Vincent and the Grenadines in which statements and actions made in Parliament were admitted as evidence in order for the Court to make a ruling. He requested for the judge to consider the statements made, as they would be critical in the trial.
“The factual matrix of this case allows statements made in National Assembly to be admitted as evidence, as those statements are relied upon to determine the conduct of the AG occurring outside Parliament. Not to admit these statements would...make it more difficult to consider whether or not a court order was observed,” Haynes continued.
Justice Joseph-Olivetti informed that the contempt orders, an application to strike out a second injunction and the substantive matters of the case must be heard by the end of this week. She requested that both sides meet after Court to plan how the rest of the case would be managed.
According to a press release issued by the Communications Unit in the Office of the Prime Minister, PM Douglas is expected to attend today’s hearing.
