Hughes: Sentence for PM’s son vacated with magistrate’s firing
Just posted on Nigel Hughes’ FB page re the firing today of Magistrate Geeta Chandan Edmund, the consequence of which is that Sam Hinds Jr who was found guilty of wounding will have to be retried.
“Press Release.
On the 16th day of January 2014 Magistrate Geeta Chandan Edmund was written to by the Judicial Service Commission in relation to the following allegations
Absence from a Magistrate’s Association meeting to discuss the Sexual Offenses Act
Medical leave for two days between the 5th and 7th June 2013
Absence for sick leave.
Failure to report absence of work to the Chancellor.
Inability to deliver 19 decisions
Failure to respond to queries from the Chief Magistrate.
Departure from Guyana on the 20th day of January 2013 without approval.
There was no allegation of misconduct leveled against Ms Chandan Edmund.
There was no hearing or any invitation to any hearing on the allegations for the entire year of 2014.
Samuel Hinds Junior was charged with a serious criminal offense of unlawful wounding on the 3rd March 2014.
Magistrate Geeta Chandan Edmund conducted the trial and found Samuel Hinds Junior guilty on the 6th February 2015.
The Magistrate deferred sentencing Mr. Hinds to allow a Probation Report to be prepared and adjourned the matter to 20th February 2015.
On the 13th day of February 2015 at 4.15 PM the Judicial Service Commission in excess of one year after they laid the above allegations against Magistrate and four days before the date sent for sentencing of Samuel Hinds Junior, the Judicial Service Commission instructed Magistrate Chandan Edmund to attend a hearing on the 18th day of February 2015.
On Monday the 16th day of February 2015 Counsel for the Magistrate wrote to the Judicial Service Commission inquiring bout the format and procedure which the Commission intended to pursue at the hearing.
On the 18th day of February 2015 the Magistrate in the company of her Attorney attended the Judicial Service Commission where Counsel for the Magistrate inquired about the rules under which the Commission intended to deliberate , the procedure to be adopted particularly whether it was an adversarial or inquisitorial proceeding.
Counsel further pointed out to the JSC that there was no rule which required the Magistrate to notify the Chancellor and or seek his permission prior to her departure from the Country.
The Commission conceded that there was no such rule in existence either in the Judicial Service Commission Rules or the Public Service Rules but said that there was a standard administrative practice that the Chancellor approve her departure
The Commission further informed the Magistrate that they were not obliged to specify what procedure they intended to pursue as they were going ahead with the inquiry.
The complainant and the adjudicator in the entire proceedings was the the Judicial Service Commission.
Every single allegation leveled against the Magistrate was answered and refuted with the production of documentary evidence including a letter from the Doctor who examined Ms Chandan Edmund.
On Friday the 20th February 2015 when the case of the Police V Samuel Hinds Junior was called, the probation officer was unable to produce a Probation Report thereby forcing an adjournment.
At 2.15 pm on the same day the Magistrate was informed “ the Commission therefore considers it both necessary and appropriate, that it is in the public interest that you be forthwith discharged from further magisterial duty”.
The immediate effect of the termination of the Magistrate’s service is that the verdict against Mr. Hinds is vacated and a new trial before a different Magistrate will now follow.
The Magistrate intends to pursue all legal remedies available to her up to the Caribbean Court of Justice