| |
News from St Kitts & Nevis as of
|
St Kitts appeal court reserves judgement in contempt case
|
| Published on Wednesday, November 4, 2009 | Email To Friend Print Version
|
The government's legal team (left to right) Henry Stogomber Browne; Senior
Counsel, Anthony Astaphan; Sylvester Anthony and Kenny Anthony at recent
press conference. (Photo by Erasmus Williams)
BASSETERRE, St Kitts (CUOPM) -- Senior Counsel, Anthony Astaphan appearing for St Kitts and Nevis Attorney General, Dennis Merchant in the contempt of court case on Tuesday, submitted to the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal, that the finding of contempt by the lower court was a travesty of justice, a severe violation of the rule of law and a constitutional heresy.
“That has been our position from day one,” said Astaphan in remarks to the media following a hearing by the three-person Court of Appeal, which consisted of Justice Michael Gordon, Madame Ola Mae Edwards and Justice Davidson Baptiste.
Astaphan disclosed that the lawyers for Shawn Richards on Tuesday morning had submitted a request for an adjournment, but this was refused by the Appeal Court after the resources of the State was offered by the government’s legal team to ensure that all documents were photocopied so that the appeal could be heard, “otherwise PAM would have come up with another excuse for a delay.”
“Our submission (to the three-judge panel) was that the injunction granted to (Richards) did not enjoin the Prime Minister, the Parliament or the Speaker of the House and clearly, the (Appeal) Court appeared from the questioning, to accept the fundamental distinction between civil proceedings and judicial review and the necessity for injunctions against Ministers as opposed to the Attorney General or the Crown,” said Astaphan, adding: “That was very clear.’
“I think what was rather transparent from the questions being directed to Leslie Haynes (Counsel for Richards), is that the Court appeared very troubled by the fact that a finding of contempt was made when (1) he (Attorney General Merchant) was sued in his Representative capacity but a finding of contempt was made in his Official capacity,” said Astaphan.
Being careful to point out that the Appeal Court has not given a ruling, Astaphan opined that “based on the questions that were being asked (by the Appeal Judges), they seemed to have considerable doubt in their minds as to whether the evidence existed on the requisite burden of proof and standards approved for the findings of contempt to be made.”
“We argued that the findings of the Learned Judge (Rita Joseph-Olivetti) were not consistent with the pleaded particulars or the capacity in which the Attorney General was sued and that the case was transformed by the Respondent (Shawn Richards) submissions, from one of failing to do the one that he did. We think that warranted us also, not only to ask for the judgement to be set aside, but to ask for an order of costs against the Respondent (Richards),” concluded Astaphan, who was assisted by Henry Stugumber Browne, Sylvester Anthony and Kenny Anthony.
Anthony also appeared on behalf of the Constituency Boundaries Commission.
Richards was represented by Leslie Haynes, Constance Mitcham, Greta Foreman and Vincent Byron.
Haynes, who was repeatedly questioned by the Judges of the Court of Appeal during his submission, struggled to find evidence of contempt by the Attorney General.
“Shawn Richards had no direct evidence,” Haynes admitted in an interview with WINNFM’s Toni Frederick after the hearing.
“Our view was that the Court was entitled to infer and to conclude and make the finding that the Court did at First Instance,” he said in the brief WINNFM interview.
In reserving their judgement, the Court ordered that a transcript related to an earlier proceeding which was relevant to the case be given to the Appeal Court and that pleadings from both sides be submitted by November 11. | | | | Reads : 453 | | | |
|
|
More news from St Kitts &
Nevis...
|
