Benschop treason PI to start August 28
Stabroek News
August 6, 2002

Related Links: Articles on Benschop
Letters Menu Archival Menu

In order to facilitate the DPP’s preparation of its case, Magistrate Chandra Sohan yesterday ordered a 23-day adjournment to the commencement of the Preliminary Inquiry into the charge of treason against Philip Bynoe and Mark Benschop.

Meanwhile, the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has indicated its intention of proceeding with the joint charge against the two men. This is despite a direction by Sohan at the last hearing that the prosecution produce Bynoe or separate the charges against the two.

Bynoe has not been seen since the events of July 3, which ended with the deaths of two persons at the Office of the President after it was violently stormed by a procession led by him. An arrest warrant has been issued by the court for his arrest.

The magistrate’s ruling followed an application by Special Prosecutor for the DPP, Sanjeev Datadin for a two-week adjournment of the matter.

This application was opposed by Raphael Trotman, defence counsel for Benschop, who resubmitted an application for bail for his client who has been in police custody since July 11.

Datadin, while reporting that he had had the opportunity to review the case file, submitted a request for a two-week adjournment in order to prepare. At the expiration of this period he said he would have been able to indicate at which time the prosecution would be ready to proceed with the inquiry.

Explaining that the discharge of his function would require all evidence and information to be put together, he insisted that he would need time to be permitted to do so and argued that any less time would be unreasonable.

Further, he stated that the prosecution would proceed as is, against both Benschop and Bynoe, until such time as a change was needed. Trotman, opposing the application, contended that there was a perennial presumption of innocence and articulated that the onus was on the prosecution to be diligent in its task, especially since a subject’s liberty was being continually denied.

While observing that under the common law rule bail is not granted in capital offences, he noted that it was an occurrence which was not unheard of.

Noting the danger of having a situation where the inquiry could go on for three years, he further argued that if there was a request for an adjournment, the scales of justice could be balanced by the granting of bail.

The magistrate, however, noted that while bail for capital offences is not unheard of, bail has never been granted for treason.

While hesitant to commit to a date for the commencement of the inquiry, Datadin acceded to commencement on August 28.

Trotman, while making it clear that the defence was vehemently opposed to Datadin’s application for an extension, submitted, however, to the guidance of the court.

The magistrate meanwhile undertook to relieve himself of all other matters on the date fixed in order to proceed with the inquiry.