Magistrate to rule on joint charge submissions
Stabroek News
August 29, 2002

Related Links: Articles on Benschop
Letters Menu Archival Menu

A dispute over the ability of the state to proceed solely against Mark Benschop in the preliminary inquiry into the charge of treason laid against Phillip Bynoe and Benschop, resulted in a one-day stay of the commencement of the proceedings.

Magistrate Chandra Sohan adjourned proceedings until today when he is to rule on a submission by Special Prosecutor for the State, Sanjeev Datadin, in relation to the state's resolution to proceed with a joint charge against Benschop, who is the lone accused in custody.

The magistrate on the two previous occasions had indicated to Datadin that he expected the charge to either be amended or severed in order to proceed with the inquiry. However, the special prosecutor yesterday reaffirmed the state's intention to proceed with the charge as currently laid. Members of Benschop's defence team, who include Mortimer Coddette, Roysdale Forde, Raphael Trotman and Shaun Allicock objected to this.

Their initial objections were founded upon arguments that the state's determination to proceed with the joint charge would amount to a mistrial. It was argued that since an arrest warrant had been issued for Bynoe it would not be possible to proceed ex parte, since the court would firstly need to withdraw the warrant before proceeding.

The prosecution's request to proceed with the charge in its present format, they argued, would be asking the court to violate the legislation, which gives the court its authority.

However, their objections were withdrawn with the hope of securing the commencement of the proceedings while Datadin would address the matter at a subsequent session.

Datadin submitted that it was the proposal of the state to proceed with the charge as it is laid, since at a PI, determination is only required of prima facie evidence so that an indictment could be laid. Noting that proceedings of such inquiries are conducted with a different threshold rather than that of guilt or innocence, he observed that the statutory requirement of presence, is to ensure that no one is in jeopardy of being tried in his absence while he is aware of proceedings.

However, defence counsel said that the attorney's submissions were self-defeatist, arguing that if the court did find there was sufficient evidence to commit Bynoe to trial, it would face the obvious jeopardy of how to proceed and a determination may be unlikely.

The magistrate, while noting that he was unfamiliar with Datadin's submissions, observed that the law is written, and the court would be guided by it. He agreed to consider Datadin's submissions as well as the authority that founded the prosecution's arguments and also resolved to do his own research into the matter, in order to determine how to proceed.

The matter was adjourned until today when the magistrate will make a ruling upon the submission and the first of the witnesses is expected to testify.

Meanwhile, there was an escalation of tensions around the environs of the courthouse, when supporters of Benschop broke police barricades at Croal Street, which prevented access to the courtyard. There were shouts of "Free Mark!" as many supporters, who were kept at bay by police ranks, gathered at the gate of the courtyard where they protested Benschop's incarceration.

They got even more agitated when heavily armed members of the Tactical Services Unit arrived at the scene to defuse the situation. Following Benschop's exit, the numerous supporters slowly dispersed.