Oliver Hinckson was once again remanded to prison as his court case took yet another turn with the prosecution asking that the charge of uttering seditious statements be put down indefinitely.
There was no movement on the advocating a terrorist act charge, as the magistrate opted not to proceed with it until he had ruled on the prosecution’s request. Hinckson is due back in court next Thursday.
Police Prosecutor Robert Tyndall made the request yesterday and Hinckson’s attorneys argued strenuously against it. Magistrate Gordon Gilhuys subsequently ruled that the prosecution return for the next hearing with valid reasons for the request to hold the uttering seditious statements charge sine die (adjourned without fixing a day for reconvening).
Attorney-at-law Llewellyn John, another of Hinckson’s lawyers, objected to Tyndall’s request calling it “wholly undesirable.” He questioned the application, stating that the prosecution was indulging in “this game” because there was no case against his client.
Magistrate Gilhuys then asked the prosecutor why he should allow the sedition charge to be put down indefinitely when the defendant was incarcerated and bail was not being granted. He further questioned why an attorney from the Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) was not handling the matter since he said it was clear that the police prosecutor was out of his depth with regard to the legal issues involved in the case.
Magistrate Gilhuys then stated that he would not deal with the prosecution’s request until the questions raised by the defence were answered.
Attorney-at-law Gregory Gaskin, also appearing for Hinckson, then addressed the court. He told the magistrate that the prosecution wished the “prostitution” of the powers of the court in indefinitely putting down the sedition charge, having it hanging over Hinckson’s head “like a sword” while he rots away in prison.
Gaskin said what the prosecution was proposing was a “travesty.” He said the prosecution has had over one month to prepare and has made no progress, while a man was incarcerated on flimsy charges.
He told the magistrate that he needed to consider whether the charges were sustainable and if he considered the evidence or lack of it thereof, in the particulars of the charges, it was clear the charges “cannot hold.”
Citing a number of authorities, Gaskin told Magistrate Gilhuys that he had it in his power to grant their client his pre-trial liberty. He also told the magistrate that the case was at the junction where bail should be granted since the prosecution was not ready to move forward. He reminded Magistrate Gilhuys that he himself had said that he would consider bail if the prosecution were not ready.
Asked to reply, the prosecutor said he would rely on his previous applications and reiterated that Hinckson was a repeat offender. He said the defendant had matters in the court when he “committed these acts.”
The advocating a terrorist act charge would have begun with the prosecution calling its first witness, Michael Gordon. However, the man did not take the stand since Magistrate Gilhuys said he was not putting anyone on the stand until the court ruled on the request to hold the sedition charge sine die and that was dependent on the prosecution’s reply to the defence at the next hearing.
At this point, Gaskin asked that his client be allowed to address the court.
Hinckson told the court that he was a final-year International Relations student at the University of Guyana and his incarceration was preventing him from attending his last four weeks of classes, which will in turn thwart any attempt to write final exams at the institution. He said Prison Director Dale Erskine had given him permission to write mid-semester exams. However, orders from a certain minister had prevented this from happening.
Magistrate Gilhuys said he could not understand why Hinckson was being prevented from writing his exams. However, he said, that was in the hands of another authority.
Hinckson has been incarcerated since March 11 when he first appeared before Principal Magistrate Melissa Robertson-Ogle and was charged indictably with advocating the commission of a terrorist act and uttering seditious statements.
His lawyers had filed a motion in the High Court seeking a declaration that the charges against him were an infringement on his right to free speech. They had also filed an application for bail. These were subsequently withdrawn since they were said to be preventing the matters from moving forward in the Magistrate’s Court.
Hinckson returns to court on April 17. (Melissa Charles)
