Minister of Local Government and Regional Development Priya Manickchand has questioned the handling of National Border Patrol Director Daniel Seeram’s case following his conviction for assaulting his former wife, insisting that the law must be applied consistently regardless of an accused person’s status or legal representation.
In a statement reflecting on the advancement of women’s rights in Guyana, Manickchand said the country had made significant progress in protecting women from harm but warned against making exceptions in individual cases that could undermine those gains.
She questioned whether the usual legal procedures following a conviction and a decision to remand an accused person pending sentencing were being followed in Seeram’s case, and called on his attorney, Nigel Hughes, to clarify the legal steps being pursued. “I don’t know what the facts are between Mr Seeram and the complainant. And I don’t need to know,” Manickchand said, noting that a court had heard the matter, found Seeram guilty and remanded him pending sentence.
The minister said Seeram was entitled to pursue all available legal defences, including appeals and consequential orders that an appellate court could make. However, she asked whether any order staying the remand decision had been made or applied for, and whether the usual procedures were being followed. “Every single time we offer a ‘but this one is different’ we halt the progress we should be making. And it is time we stop,” she said.
Manickchand argued that the handling of such cases had implications beyond the individuals involved, particularly for women who might be considering reporting abuse or seeking protection through the courts. “These are public policy issues that cause shifts and changes one way or the other,” she said, adding that women needed to be confident that their rights would not be eroded when an accused person obtained high-profile legal representation.
She also said the public needed to be assured that the courts would treat cases fairly, regardless of who appeared before them.
Seeram, who serves as National Border Patrol Director, was found guilty on October 2 of assault causing actual bodily harm against his former wife, Farzana Hamid, following a trial before Magistrate Abigail Gibbs at the Sparendaam Magistrate’s Court. He was remanded to prison pending sentencing, which is scheduled for November 2.
Seeram’s attorney subsequently challenged the magistrate’s decision to remand him, arguing that the decision effectively predetermined a prison sentence before the completion of the sentencing process.
On October 5, High Court Justice Joy Persaud-Singh dismissed Seeram’s application for judicial review, finding no indication that the magistrate had acted unlawfully, irrationally or outside her jurisdiction. The ruling upheld the decision to refuse bail. Seeram’s legal team subsequently indicated that it would approach the Court of Appeal in a further attempt to secure his release pending sentencing. Since then, it has not been clear where Seeram is being kept. His lawyer and the police have said nothing. On Friday the Guyana Prison Service confirmed that Seeram was not in its custody.
The case arose from a complaint concerning an incident at the former couple’s Cummings Lodge apartment on September 11, 2023. Hamid testified she was awakened by a sharp pain to her head and realised Seeram was hitting her. She said she began recording the incident on her phone, which was subsequently taken from her and damaged.
The magistrate found that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and rejected Seeram’s account that he had merely pushed Hamid while attempting to leave the apartment.
In her statement, Manickchand also reflected on her admission to the Bar in 2000, describing the changes in the legal system and society’s response to domestic violence over the past 26 years. She recalled an experience early in her legal career when a magistrate questioned whether a man should be removed from his home for a “mere slap”.
Manickchand said the exchange demonstrated a lack of understanding of the nature of domestic violence, which she explained often involves repeated incidents of abuse before a victim seeks legal intervention.
She noted that the Domestic Violence Act was four years old at the time and that the Sexual Offences Act had not yet been enacted. The latter was passed in 2010 following a national advocacy campaign known as “Stamp It Out”, she said.
The minister said access to finances, education, training, home ownership and political representation for women had improved significantly, crediting advocacy by political organisations, non-governmental organisations, religious leaders and members of the public. However, she maintained that progress would be undermined if laws and principles designed to protect women were applied inconsistently.
Manickchand said the Seeram matter highlighted the importance of ensuring that the rights of women were protected without compromising an accused person’s entitlement to due process. She also questioned whether the public was receiving sufficient clarity about the legal steps being taken in the case, saying the difficulty of separating facts from social media commentary underscored the need for fair and responsible reporting.
The minister called for greater transparency about whether the ordinary legal process was being followed and, if not, why any departure had occurred. “Our country and her people deserve more. And want more,” she said.
The Guyana Police Force has provided no explanation for why Seeram was not handed over to the prisons.
Discussion