BAIL BILL: DEFEAT FOR AG, NOW WHAT?

INDEPENDENT senators who have refused to sanction the further denial of citizens’ liberty deserve our appreciation. 

Some members of the Independent bench in the Upper House said during debate on Monday that they would not vote for an extension of the Bail (Amendment) Bill. 

The Bill provides for jailing accused on firearm and other offenses for up to 120 days as they await their respective trials. 

It is designed to give further life to a highly questionable law with no track record of success. 

In a land in which the justice system seems to be moving in reverse, innocent people – including victims of corrupt police officers – could land up in jail for four months. 

And that is before they get their day in court! 

The defeat of the Bill – the Government hurriedly withdrew it from the next day’s Order Paper of the House of Representatives – is particularly severe on Attorney General Reginald Armour. 

In 2016, Armour, as President of the Law Association, condemned the legislation as having no deterrent effect on crime. 

“Pre-trial detention for up to 120 days … is not reasonably justifiable in a society that has a proper respect for the rights and freedoms of the individual, given the unarguable inability of the criminal justice system to process those who are incarcerated under this legislation, within a reasonable time.” 

That was an emphatic rejection of the Bill. 

But there was more. 

“Incarceration, therefore, amounts to a breach of the right to liberty without due process. 

“Bail is now punitive in nature as opposed to securing the attendance of the accused in court.” 

Remand conditions in prison were correctly described as deplorable, barbaric, and inhumane. 

The Armour-led Law Association was also concerned about misconduct by law enforcement officers. 

“There are no safeguards against malfeasance by police officers…” 

In the Senate last week, Armour, now the Attorney General, was singing another tune. 

He appeared to have had an epiphany.  

He called the legislation “a critical tool in the crime-fighting armoury”. 

Armour said that “the statistics which this Government has researched show a very serious state of affairs”. 

In other words, the crime epidemic had worsened. 

That seemed like a plain admission that the law had not served its purpose. 

The AG said that several anti-crime measures – such as the forensics system – had improved. 

Opposition senators stuck to the script of denouncing a Bill the UNC had resisted since 2016. 

But the revelation came from Independent voices. 

Senator Evans Welch said the legislation was equivalent to “clapping with one hand”, and that extending the life of the Bill without other anti-crime measures was “spinning top in mud”. 

“Over the past three years, there should have been measures in place to expedite the trials of the particular offenses and offenders,” Welch said, “to have it completed within 120 days”. 

Senator Charisse Seepersad noted that the country was worse off with respect to crime, and the legislation “will not act as a deterrent…” 

Senator Varma Deyalsingh recalled that the Government had promised the legislation would be “a temporary measure that would help fight crime”. 

Deyalsingh recalled that Faris Al Rawi, as Attorney General, had pledged to “put other things in place…” 

Dr. Maria Dillon had plaintive enquiries: “How would this amendment help with the current situation? 

“How did the application of this Act help the police with fighting crime?” 

So, the Government has again played its favourite anti-crime card – but this time could not get past discerning Independent senators, whose votes are required for a measure that contravenes the national constitution. 

The authorities appear to have no more prescriptions for what Professor Selwyn Ryan had warned 10 years ago as “a dagger aimed at the heart of Port of Spain”. 

Today, there are blazing guns in the capital city – once dubbed the New York of the Caribbean – and rampant crime everywhere else in the land.  

To be sure, we would continue to hear platitudes and promises from the authorities.  

Even acting police chief McDonald Jacob was waxing rhetorical – and borderline political – the other day. 

Prime Minister Dr. Keith Rowley would engage in the semantics of renaming the crisis as “a public health emergency”, although no one is sure how that would end the scourge. 

But there seem to be no more servings from what the Government had termed in 2015 as “a menu of measures”. 

Meanwhile, armed and brutal criminals stalk the land.