Motion by Chief Magistrate challenging DPP claims
--No hearing yesterday by George Barclay
Guyana Chronicle
August 20, 2002

Related Links: Articles on Benschop
Letters Menu Archival Menu



THE Affidavit in answer by the Chief Magistrate, Acting, Mrs Juliet Holder-Allen, which was to have been filed by yesterday for hearing before Chief Justice Mr Carl Singh, has not been effected, a source from the Supreme Court Registry said yesterday.

The matter was adjourned from last month to yesterday before the Chief Justice, when Attorney-at-law Mr Nigel Hughes was also expected to make certain preliminary points on procedural errors on behalf of the Magistrate.

But this too did not take place, since the Chief Justice was said to be presiding at a Full Court in Berbice yesterday, and as a consequence, the hearing in Georgetown could not go on.

It is understood that the Chief Justice will be sending out notices informing all parties about a new date for the hearing.

The Chief Magistrate (Ag), who had transferred the Benschop Treason case to another Magistrate for hearing, after the Chief Justice had issued a Nisi Order of Certiorari preventing her from conducting the inquiry on a particular date, because of alleged bias and prejudice, is challenging the allegation of bias and prejudice by the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Chief Magistrate Holder-Allen had appeared before the Chief Justice in Open Court in obedience to a Nisi Order granted by the same judge in accordance with an application from the DPP.

Mr Ashton Chase, S.C. associated with Mr Khemraj Ramjattan and Mr Rafiq Khan had entered appearance for the DPP, while Mr Hughes entered appearance for the Magistrate, who elected to have private representation.

Mr Hughes had also notified the Chief Justice that he proposes to make a preliminary point in relation to certain procedural errors in the application by the DPP.

After the DPP was denied a three-week adjournment by the Magistrate to facilitate the execution of the warrant against the number two defendant Phillip Bynoe, and following exchanges with the Magistrate, he (the DPP) approached the Chief Justice for writs of Certiorari and Prohibition to prevent the Magistrate from proceeding with the inquiry on a particular date on the basis of allegations that there were apparent bias and prejudice on the part of the Magistrate.

The Chief Justice granted a Nisi Order prohibiting the Magistrate from proceeding on the 25th day of July 2002 with the Preliminary Inquiry into charges of treason against Phillip Bynoe and Mark Benschop on the grounds that it would be unreasonable to do so and in breach of the principles of natural justice.

The Chief Justice had also granted an order or rule Nisi of Prohibition directed to the Chief Magistrate, prohibiting her from continuing to preside over the Preliminary Inquiry into the charge of Treason against Phillip Bynoe and Mark Benschop on the grounds of prejudice and bias.

After receiving the order the Chief Magistrate had transferred the matter to a junior Magistrate.