The GHRA yesterday called on the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to release the full video of the October 12 shooting in Kitty amid growing questions over the role of the Police Special Branch Head in the incident and the subsequent
remanding of the Opposition Leader.
In a statement, the Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA) said that it has been closely following the appearance of a new video related to the shooting incident at the home of the Head of the Police Special Branch, Prem Narine. The GHRA also noted the statement yesterday of the DPP that the full tape, which comes from a neighbour, is in her possession.
“The GHRA urgently calls on the DPP to release the full video. The GHRA has already expressed its deepest concern over the incarceration of (Leader of the Opposition, Azruddin Mohamed). The GHRA is also calling on the DPP to reconsider its objection to bail being granted to Mr. Mohamed”, the rights body said.
Amid mounting controversy following the broadcast of the new video on Saturday, the DPP in a rare statement yesterday
warned that the circulation of excerpts of video evidence and accompanying commentary on social media could prejudice a fair trial and may amount to obstructing the course of justice.
The DPP’s Chambers said the footage formed part of the prosecution’s case in criminal proceedings pending at the Georgetown Magistrate’s Court and was disclosed to defence counsel in court on Friday, November 6.
It described the recording as “merely one link in an evidential chain” and said it should not be considered separately from other material, including witness statements specifically relating to it.
According to the statement, some social media publications were circulating only a small excerpt of the recording, further distorting the evidence.
The footage came from the camera system at the home of one of the prosecution’s main witnesses, who submitted it in support of a written statement to police, the DPP’s Chambers said. It did not identify the witness.
“In the circumstances, as Ministers of Justice, we appeal to users of the social media, to immediately cease and desist circulating and distorting partial evidence in an ongoing criminal case,” the statement said.
“While we respect people’s constitutional right to comment on important matters, evidence is a matter for the determination of the court.”
The statement did not specify which portions of the circulating recording it considered misleading or explain how the other evidence affected its interpretation.
Critics have said that the police have withheld evidence from the public as part of a campaign to shape charges against the Opposition Leader and have not acted with similar rigour as it relates to Narine’s conduct. Observers in the law enforcement community have said that based on the information available Narine’s conduct was reckless and he, too, should have been facing investigation in the same manner as the Opposition Leader.
The newly circulated footage of the October 12 incident appeared to show Narine standing beside a building on Barr Street, Kitty, with his arm extended and firing towards the vehicle carrying Mohamed and two employees.
Mohamed’s lawyers maintain that he neither possessed nor fired a gun and say the surveillance recordings support his account. The government has previously defended Narine’s actions, saying he was responding to gunfire.
The footage has prompted calls for an independent investigation. APNU parliamentary team leader Terrence Campbell said it raised questions about Narine’s account and should be considered in the prosecution of the firearm case and applications for bail in the separate cybercrime proceedings.
The Alliance For Change has also called for an independent international forensic investigation encompassing all recordings and the ballistic, firearms, medical and other evidence. It urged examination of the recordings’ authenticity, continuity and chain of custody, including whether any material had been edited or altered.
Mohamed, his driver Eugene Thorne and Mario Mohamed pleaded not guilty on October 16 to charges of unlawful possession of a firearm, unlawful possession of ammunition and attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Magistrate Faith McGusty granted each man bail totalling $750,000. The case was adjourned on Friday to November 27. Thorne was rearrested after leaving the courtroom, Kiskadee Watch reported on Saturday.
The obtaining and sharing of police surveillance footage subsequently became the subject of a separate investigation. On October 26, Mohamed released the CCTV footage that he said supported his allegation that Narine fired at him during the late-night encounter in Kitty, Georgetown, on October 12. Mohamed and Police Constable Ryan Greene were then charged under the Cybercrime Act on October 30 over the CCTV footage and remanded after appearing before Magistrate Abigail Gibbs at the Sparendaam Magistrate’s Court.
That case concerns allegations that footage was obtained from a protected computer system at the police Command Centre and passed to Mohamed without lawful authority. The DPP’s latest statement, by contrast, identifies the footage addressed in its warning as originating from a camera system at a prosecution witness’s home.
Justice Priscilla Chandra-Hanif is scheduled to rule on November 13 on the Attorney General’s application to strike out portions of the affidavit supporting Mohamed’s bail challenge. The substantive hearing challenging the refusal of bail is fixed for November 23. Greene’s bail application is scheduled to be heard today.
In his statement on Sunday, Campbell called for:
1. An immediate, independent investigation into Prem Narine’s conduct and prosecution if the evidence establishes criminal wrongdoing.
2. The preservation, independent forensic examination and disclosure of the newly emerged video evidence.
3. An immediate reconsideration of the bail applications of Azruddin Mohamed and Ryan Greene in light of this material change in circumstances.
The rule of law, he said, demands impartiality, accountability and equal treatment before the law. No individual should be above scrutiny, and no individual should be deprived of liberty simply because the State has chosen to accept one version of events without adequately testing its credibility.
Discussion