BERBICE Magistrate Geeta Chandan, accused of remanding James Gibson to prison on a spent warrant while a $450,000 bail bond was in force, has denied the allegation.
She
explained that the prisoner was remanded because he had breached
the condition of the recognisance signed by him.
This
explanation was embodied in an affidavit in answer by the
Magistrate which was presented to Justice B.S. Roy when the matter
was called up in court yesterday.
It
was at the continuation of the hearing of a constitutional motion
brought by Elizabeth Gibson, seeking, among other things, a habeas
corpus writ for the production of her son, James Gibson.
The
applicant’s counsel Mr. Basil Williams, who criticised
the manner in which his client was held in custody, had asked the
court to ensure that the magistrate be brought to court to have
her story tested by cross-examination.
Senior
Counsel Mr. Murselene Bacchus for the Magistrate said she would be
attending court on Thursday at 13:30 h. Williams, who claims
Gibson is being treated like a Political prisoner, is contending
that his client’s fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed
under sections 40, 139, and 144 of the Constitution have been
contravened.
Williams
has applied to the court for leave to reply to the Magistrate’s
affidavit in answer.
In
her affidavit in answer, the magistrate stated:
“I concede that an order was made by Justice Jainarayan Singh but say that there was nothing to make absolute. Further, that order did not prohibit me from remanding the defendant. I remanded the defendant on the 26th of June, 2006, because of his aforesaid breaches and not because he was arrested on a warrant”.
Saturday,
July 15, 2006