On October 2nd, National Border Patrol Director, Daniel Seeram was found guilty by Magistrate Abigail Gibbs of a serious assault on his former wife and ordered remanded to prison pending sentencing on November 2nd.
An application for judicial review of the Magistrate’s decision to remand pending sentencing was lodged with the High Court. Justice Joy Persaud-Singh before whom the application came up ordered on October 3rd that Mr Seeram be kept at the Sparendaam lockups pending an examination of his application.
On October 5th, when his application came up for hearing, Justice Persaud-Singh ruled against Mr Seeram. She said there was no indication that Magistrate Gibbs had acted unlawfully, irrationally or outside of her jurisdiction. Accordingly, she dismissed the application for judicial review and upheld the magistrate’s decision to refuse bail.
Mr Seeram’s legal team then signalled that they would be moving to the Court of Appeal in a further bid to secure his release pending sentencing on November 2nd. In the interregnum, Mr Seeram should have been remanded to one of the main prisons. This was a matter within the purview of the police force and the prison service.
Two days later, Mr Seeram has not been confined at one of the prisons. The order of the magistrate has therefore been ignored in an egregious breach of the rule of law. It is evident that since Mr Seeram pledged fealty to the ruling PPP/C this was meant to confer upon him some type of protection from the consequences of his behaviour and the public is now seeing the evidence of this.
President Ali and his lieutenants talk fulsomely about their respect for the law and undoubtedly if they were pressed on how the Magistrate’s order has been defied they may find some willing soul in the police or prisons to take the rap for defying the magistrate similar to the way Region 10 is being denied the election of a chair and deputy chair.
There should, however, be no mistaking about this. The failure to hand over Mr Seeram to the prison has clearly been orchestrated by those in authority otherwise there would have been immediate declamations from senior figures in the government. There has been silence.
Aside from the fact that Mr Seeram should have been dismissed upon conviction from his cosmetic post as National Border Patrol Director there should have been strict adherence by the police force and the prison service to the ruling by Magistrate Gibbs.
This is clearly a matter for the Minister of Home Affairs, Oneidge Walrond who has already gotten herself into a muddle relating to another serious matter. That case pertains to the Deputy Commissioner of Police and the Head of the Special Organized Crime Unit, Fazil Karimbaksh who remains on the job despite an allegation of rape that has been levelled against him by a policewoman. Immediately after the registering of the complaint he should have been sent on leave to facilitate a probe uninfluenced by his presence.
To make matters worse, the public is unaware of who is investigating the allegation against Mr Karimbaksh and whether the team has the standing and competence to discharge this task.
As much as it tries to create a tableau of a modern state that comports with international human rights standards, openness and fidelity to the rule of law this government is failing in all of these categories.
Discussion