CMC -National Security Minister in Trinidad and Tobago, Fitzgerald Hinds, Wednesday said he had received a “thorough oral report in great detail,” from Police Commissioner Erla Christopher regarding the removal of a Trinidadian national from Barbados. A High Court judge in the twin island republic said that the man, Brent Thomas, had been “abducted” and brought back to Port of Spain to face criminal charges.
“I requested of the Police Commissioner a thorough report on the matter which was delivered to me orally by her in great detail so that I know of no other report,” Hinds told Parliament in response to a question from the opposition, declining to indicate whether or not he had received reports from any other source.
“I am fully aware the police continue to conduct an investigation into the circumstances aforementioned,” he added.
Prime Minister Dr. Keith Rowley told legislators that he had not discussed the issue during his holiday in Barbados last weekend.
He said while he had met with many members of the Barbados government “none of which was for the purpose of discussing anything to do with Brent Thomas”.
Barbados Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Dale Marshall, in a lengthy statement to Parliament on Tuesday regarding the detention of firearms dealer Brent Thomas, described as “unfortunate language” the Trinidad and Tobago High Court characterization of what transpired in Barbados on October 5 last year in relation to Thomas as an “abduction”.
He said that Barbados has an Extradition Act, which applies to a large number of criminal offences, including the firearm and other offences for which the warrants of arrest for Thomas were issued.
“I can confirm that no request was made for the extradition of Mr. Thomas,” he told legislators, adding “from the reports that I have received, I am satisfied that the actions of the Barbados Police Service have fallen short of applicable legal norms, such as acting under an extradition request.
“I, however, cannot associate myself with the description of the actions of the Barbados Police officers as an abduction or as has been elsewhere been described as a kidnapping,” Marshall added.
Last weekend, the state confirmed that it had filed an appeal in the case involving Thomas whom Justice Devindra Rampersad said had been “abducted” in Barbados by law enforcement officers there.
The state is also seeking to set aside the orders of the judge and to have the costs of the appeal paid by Thomas.
In his ruling, Justice Rampersad found that the detention and transporting of Thomas from Barbados to Trinidad and Tobago via a non-commercial aircraft constituted an “abduction”, and ruled that Thomas’ constitutional rights had been breached and that his arrest and detention were therefore “unconstitutional, unlawful, arbitrary, unnecessary and disproportionate”.
But the state in its appeal is arguing that constitutional protection offered by the Constitution does not extend extra-territorially, and is therefore not applicable to events taking place in Barbados and to the Barbados police.
Thomas was first arrested on September 29, 2022, and later released. He was re-arrested in Barbados, from where he said he intended to travel to Miami to meet his cardiologist, and returned forcibly to Trinidad and Tobago.
He was later charged with possession of a series of weapons, including grenades and rifles.
Thomas had in a constitutional motion challenged his detention and the procurement of search warrants for his home and his dealership.
Meanwhile, Justice Rampersad Wednesday said a recent statement by Hinds that “criminals have friends everywhere in this country” including the parliament and the judiciary, “does not impact on me only, but the other 110 judicial officers”.
The judge noted that Hinds had opted not to accept his invitation to attend court on Wednesday to clarify his comment. Hinds, who is also an attorney, had earlier said he was seeking legal advice on the invitation.
Justice Rampersad said while the Judiciary is not immune to criticism, but when an officer of the court does it it jeopardises the Judiciary.
He said the statement by Hinds implied that the integrity of the Judiciary is compromised by illegality, which is “very damning and absolutely wrong”.
He said that with no clarification, Hinds’ statement left a cloud of illegality over the Judiciary which, drop by drop, undermines it.
“The damning effect of leaving that cloud is that the drops will turn into torrents, which will lead to flooding, then to unimaginable damage. The view of young people looking on will be that anyone can say anything with no regard to the truth, without consequences,” Rampersad said.
About The Author
More Stories
More women needed in ICT field
Campbell’s suspension reduced
BNOC workers back on the job