THE SUPREME COURT OF GRENADA

AND THE WEST INDIES ASSOCIATED STATES

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

(CIVIL)

 

HIGH COURT

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10 OF 2004

 

IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSTITUTION OF GRENADA

 

AND

 

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY

BERNARD COARD AND OTHERS FOR REDRESS

PURSUANT TO SECTION 16 OF THE SAID

CONSTITUTION OF GRENADA FOR

CONTRAVENTION OF SECTIONS 3, 5 AND 8 THEREOF

IN RELATION TO THEM

 

BETWEEN:

 

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

APPELLANT

 

AND

 

 

BERNARD COARD, CALLISTUS BERNARD,

LESTER REDHEAD, CHRISTOPHER STROUDE,

HUDSON AUSTIN, LIAM JAMES, LEON CORNWALL,

JOHN ANTHONY VENTOUR, DAVE BARTHOLOMEW,

EWART LAYNE, COLVILLE MCBARNETTE,

SELWYN STRACHAN, AND CECIL PRIME

 

RESPONDENTS

 

 

 

 


AFFIDAVIT

 

 

 


WE, BERNARD COARD, CALLISTUS BERNARD, LESTER REDHEAD, CHRISTOPHER STROUDE, HUDSON AUSTIN, LIAM JAMES, LEON CORNWALL, JOHN ANTHONY VENTOUR, DAVE BARTHOLOMEW, EWART LAYNE, COLVILLE McBARNETTE, SELWYN STRACHAN and CECIL PRIME, hereinafter referred to as 'the Respondents', being duly sworn, MAKE OATH AND SAY AS FOLLOWS:-

 

 

1.          We are the Respondents in Civil Appeal No. 10 of 2004;

2.          We have been prisoners of the Appellant for over 20 calendar years;

3.          We have read the Notice of Appeal, the Application for a Stay, and the Affidavit of the Attorney General, Mr. Raymond Anthony, in the said Civil Appeal No. 10 of 2004 and in particular, paragraph 4 of the said affidavit;

4.          We are in daily contact with over 100 prison officers and civilian workers from all parishes and scores of villages on mainland Grenada;

5.          We are also in contact with scores of religious and other persons who visit the prison on a regular basis;

6.          We have access to the electronic and print media and we follow local news on a daily basis;

7.          From all of the sources referred to in paragraphs 4-6 herein we gather that the overwhelming public reaction to the Order of the Honouable Justice Kenneth Benjamin which Order the Appellant is now seeking to have stayed, is one of relief, and hope, that after the passage of over 20 years the nation would soon be able to put the matter of the ‘Grenada Seventeen’ (as the Respondents are customarily referred to) behind it once and for all;

8.          We have seen and heard prominent Grenadians such as the former parliamentarian and government minister and former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Mr. George McGuire, state that too much of the nation’s energies are being consumed on this one case and that it is time to put it to rest and give the country an opportunity to settle down;

9.          It is a notorious fact that in October 2003, Amnesty International, on the 20th anniversary of the detention of the Respondents, issued a Report on the trial of the Respondents concluding inter alia that:

                    i.              “the trial of the Grenada 17 was fatally flawed and did not meet international standards” [Page 32 Amnesty International Report titled The Grenada 17 : Last of the cold war prisoners?] ;

                  ii.              “the Grenada 17 cannot continue to be incarcerated on the grounds of a conviction that was obtained via a process that was in gross violation of international standards governing the fairness of trials” [Ibid, page 32];

10.          Over the last ten years we have lived among persons on whom the mandatory death sentence was also imposed prior to the decision of the Privy Council in Peter Hughes v. The Queen and who remain on death row;

11.          We have been informed by Mr. Lloyd Noel who, along with lawyers from the English firm of Simons Muirhead & Burton, is the attorney for several of these death row prisoners, that in or around October 2002, the Director of Public Prosecutions, in open court, notified the High Court that the Crown accepted that the decision in Peter Hughes v. The Queen applies to persons on death row whose cases were determined prior to that decision and that steps would be soon taken to bring them back before the court for re sentencing in accordance with the said decision in Peter Hughes v. The Queen. A true copy of a correspondence sent by legal counsel to Mr. Paul Lallion, one of the persons upon whom the mandatory death sentence was imposed in 1994, is hereby attached and marked A.B.1;

12.          We have been advised by counsel and verily believe that given that the Director of Public Prosecutions has accepted that the decision in Peter Hughes v. The Queen applies to cases decided before that decision, the Appellant is not acting in good faith when he seeks a Stay of the sentencing hearing ordered by the Learned Trial Judge on the basis that the decision in Peter Hughes v. The Queen does not have retroactive effect;

13.          We are aware from diverse sources in and outside Grenada, including the electronic and print media, from the Amnesty International Report aforesaid, and from Mr. Alan Scott of the London-based Committee for Human Rights in Grenada, that the Honourable Prime Minister has stated expressly and impliedly on several occasions, that the issue of the release or the continued detention of the Respondents is not a matter for the court but for the people of the country as a whole; in other words, it is a political and not a legal issue;

14.          We heard and saw the Honourable Prime Minister on MTV on Tuesday 23rd March 2004 on a programme, YOUR GOVERNMENT AND YOU, where he was asked by one caller for his reaction to the decision of the Honourable Justice Benjamin. In response, the Honourable Prime Minister  said inter alia:

 I have always said I believe in reconciliation, I believe in forgiveness. That’s a fundamental concept of mine. But you know, I have always said any major decision that affects the psychic [sic] of the country cannot be made by me. There are some people that believe even if I wanted to say that to forgive and to release, that I can do it by myself; this is a decision for Keith Mitchell. This is not a decision for Keith Mitchell. This is a decision for the country. And anything that affects Grenadian psychic [sic] in a way negatively and would hurt the country I cannot use the votes of the people to do it. Before I do it I will resign the office of Prime Minister. And I’ve said that to almost every one who came and asked me about, about supporting release of individuals. The reality is, Grenadians have not yet come to terms with the release of the 17 on the Hill. And that’s the reality. And any Prime Minister that goes and takes the votes of the people without using that as a main plank of his platform, and release them against the feeling of the population do, do not deserve to be at the office of the Prime Minister. And I think I — I hope that clarifies it…

I want to say again, the recent decision made by the Lord Justice Benjamin with respect to the guys. Again, my government…my government is moving to appeal that case. And we are confident that that appeal is likely to be upheld. Because in every single case in the past where the Courts of Appeal have had to deal with this particular matter it has consistently said that it has no jurisdiction. That the guys were tried under old PRG law. And therefore, I do not expect that they will give a different decision this time.

15.          We have been informed by counsel and verily believe that it is inaccurate to say that “in every single case in the past where the Court of Appeal have had to deal with this particular matter it has consistently said that it has no jurisdiction”; and that in any case the sentences of imprisonment for remainder of natural life was an executive and not a judicial act;

16.          We have been advised by counsel and verily believe that, in their view, as a matter of law, the Appellant’s Notice of Application does not disclose grounds for the granting of a Stay of execution of the sentencing hearing ordered by the Honourable Justice Benjamin; and we conclude that the said Application is politically motivated, frivolous and vexatious and driven by the misguided proposition of the Honourable Prime Minister that, in effect, it is his government in consultation with the people, and not the court, which must determine what sentence should be imposed on the Respondents under the convictions returned by the jury on December 4th 1986;

17.          In the premises we pray that the application for the Stay of execution of the aforesaid sentencing hearing be refused.

 

_______________________________

HUDSON AUSTIN

_______________________________

COLVILLE McBARNETTE

_______________________________

DAVE BARTHOLOMEW

_______________________________

CECIL PRIME

_______________________________

CALLISTUS BERNARD

_______________________________

LESTER REDHEAD

_______________________________

BERNARD COARD

_______________________________

SELWYN STRACHAN

_______________________________

LEON CORNWALL

_______________________________

CHRISTOPHER STROUDE

_______________________________

LIAM JAMES

_______________________________

JOHN ANTHONY VENTOUR

_______________________________

EWART LAYNE

 

 

SWORN TO by the above-named

Deponents at Richmond Hill Prison

in the parish of St. George,

this 15th day of April, 2004

 

 

Before me,

 

REGISTRAR HIGH COURT

GRENADA

 

 

 

This affidavit is filed on behalf of the Respondents by Cajeton Hood, Attorney-at-Law, whose address for service is c/o Ciboney Chambers, Ciboney House, No. 7 H. A. Blaize Street, St. George’s, Grenada. W.I.