By Alric Lindsay
During a discussion of the status of disclosures in the case of Tiquan Raheim Forbes in Summary Court on November 26, 2024, the Chief Magistrate highlighted that the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions breached a Summary Court order. The Chief Magistrate raised a concern about whether the DPP’s compliance with Summary Court orders differed from its compliance with orders from higher courts, for example, the Grand Court or the Court of Appeal.
The initial disquiet was voiced after lawyers discussed the background of the Forbes’ matter before the Summary Court, where it is understood thousands of pages of disclosure documents were supposed to be provided to the defence. However, the defence noted yesterday that none of the documents were provided.
When the Chief Magistrate asked DPP counsel about the disclosure status, DPP counsel said: “All I can say is it is still outstanding.”
This response appeared to be unsatisfactory to the Summary Court.
In the circumstances, the Chief Magistrate reminded DPP counsel that on October 18, 2024, she made an order for the DPP to serve the documents within seven days. However, over a month later, the DPP still had not complied with the order of the Summary Court.
The Chief Magistrate stressed:
I’ve made an order for this to happen in this period of time. At the very least, write to the court and let the court know if there is a difficulty…
Instead of the DPP informing the Summary Court of any challenges, the DPP counsel came to the court “to blankly say nothing to the court.”
The Chief Magistrate added that she found the DPP’s non-compliance with the previous Summary Court order to be “of the utmost disrespect.”
“I’m not going to stand for it again,” she warned.
She then put DPP counsel on notice that, in the New Year, everyone would be held accountable for breaches of Summary Court orders.
The matter was then scheduled for mention on December 17, 2024, and the defendant’s bail was extended to that date.
Note to readers:
Delays in the DPP’s provision of disclosures or evidence appear to be an unfortunate trend. This was recently seen in the 18-month delay in the DPP providing evidence in Joseph Hurlston’s case. That resulted in an abuse of process application being filed.
Other parties have also had to fight for disclosures, including Doctors Express, whose premises were unlawfully raided and for which no one was seemingly held accountable.
