Justice BS Roy yesterday dismissed a notice of motion filed in the High Court on behalf of treason accused Mark Benschop in an effort to secure certain declarations including the discharge of the indictment against him.
Attorney-at-law Benjamin Gibson, who is representing Benschop, had filed the application in the High Court claiming that his client's right to a trial within a reasonable time was being directly affected by constant adjournments in a constitutional motion before Justice Jainarayan Singh Jnr.
Attorneys Priya Manick-chand and Glen Hanoman had, in February 2003, sought and obtained nisi orders of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition after filing a constitutional motion on behalf of eight prisoners petitioning to have their trials conducted in the order that they had been charged.
This matter is still pending before Justice Singh Jnr who had granted the nisi orders.
But the judge pointed out that Gibson had filed a motion in October last year through which he had sought similar reliefs and remedies on Benschop's behalf before Justice Dawn Gregory-Barnes. Justice Gregory-Barnes had dismissed that motion last December.
According to Justice Roy, a careful perusal of the reliefs and remedies sought in this motion and those contained in the motion that had been taken before Justice Gregory-Barnes reveals no dissimilarity.
The judge said that this observation coupled with his [Justice Roy's] agreement that the applicant's proceedings is res judicature and amounts to an abuse of the process of the court, an argument raised by Attorney-General Doodnauth Singh SC, requires that the motion be dismissed and the reliefs and remedies sought, refused.
Justice Roy further ordered that Benschop refrain from making any similar application before "any sitting judge of the High Court" until such time as Benschop's indictment is presented for trial.
The application dismissed by Justice Roy had sought declarations that "...the delay and continued delay of the disposal of indictable allegations against the applicant is unconstitutional, null and void; the indictment against the applicant be dismissed; the order nisi of Justice Jainarayan Singh is unconstitutional, null and void [and] compensation for the delay of the applicant's trial by an unlawful order..."
In the application that had been dismissed by Justice Gregory-Barnes, Benschop had sought declarations that "...that the continued adjournment and hearing of the order nisi in application #153 - M of 2003 is calculated to delay the fair trial of the applicant's indictment and is unconstitutional, null and void; the continued delay of the trial of the indictment is calculated to remove the indictment from being conducted before Justice Winston Moore; unless the indictment be presented for hearing during the present Assize that the indictment be quashed; the order nisi constituted in application #153 - M of 2003 be discharged; compensation for hardship and distress [and] costs."
In the matter before Justice Singh Jnr, the orders obtained against Ramlal had subsequently been dismissed after her lawyer, Sase Narine, had indicated that each of the applicants' depositions had been prepared, filed and sent to the DPP.
The DPP had later entered a nolle prosequi in the proceedings against one of the prisoners, Seetal Sookdeo, and he had then been freed from the Georgetown Prisons.
The other applicants in that matter are Kenneth Richard-son (12.02.03), Michael Joe (18.09.02), Phillip Cordis (23.05.02), Ivor Gavin Roberts (10.09.02), Omesh Persaud (21.03.02), Vibert Layne (21.11.02) and Paul John (09.10.03).
Meanwhile, Justice Roy expressed the court's displeasure at the delay in the reading of his decision consequent to the late arrival of the State Counsel from the AG's chambers.
The judge rejected the junior counsel's explanation that the AG's chambers had been unaware that a date had been set for the decision, asserting that efforts ought to have been made to contact the Registrar in relation to whether or not a date had been scheduled, especially since the matter is one of major public interest.