(Trinidad Express) Media bosses will be fined TT$150,000 and imprisoned for two years if they publish certain matters from the sufficiency (pre-trial) hearing, under the Indictable Offences (Preliminary Enquiry) bill, which was debated in the House of Representatives yesterday.
The bill would repeal and replace the Indictable Offences Preliminary Enquiry Act and would provide for a system of pre-trial proceedings which would reduce the time taken before a matter goes to the High Court.
But Justice Minister Herbert Volney noted that like the present Act, there were restrictions on the media reporting certain information, but the penalty had been increased dramatically in the new bill.
In the current bill, the penalty is TT$2,000 and four months’ imprisonment for the publication of information given at the preliminary enquiry. Initially, the bill tabled and debated suggested an increase in the fine of TT$250,000 and five years’ imprisonment. However, the Opposition vigorously opposed the penalty and Government, at committee stage, amended it.
In justifying the increase, Volney stated: “It was felt that the current penalty was an insufficient deterrent.” He added that information about witnesses cannot be published and “this is necessary in the interest of safety in order to protect the identity of witnesses”.
Volney said this limit on press freedom was necessary to protect the integrity of the proceedings in serious criminal matters and witnesses who are essential to the proceedings.
Volney said the preliminary enquiry has long outlived its usefulness, as the dynamics of volume and systems have changed. He said over the years, the preliminary hearing before a magistrate has become a nightmare of the justice system. He said the corridors of the Magistrates’ Court in the morning look like a market place, “a total waste of manpower hours for families of persons who are charged, victims of crime as well as police officers… whose time is better spent on the streets”.
He said the criminal justice system was bursting at its seams and the bill would serve to expedite the judicial process in indictable or serious criminal matters. He said there was much delay and one of the major “culprits” was the prevailing pre-trial criminal procedure, known as the preliminary enquiry. He said there was an endemic backlog of cases in the Magistrates’ Courts awaiting preliminary enquiries.
Volney said at the preliminary enquiry there is extensive cross-examination, complex legal submissions and persistent adjournments.
“Witnesses are required to come to court and give evidence. Such a protracted system allows the opportunity for bribery, for intimidation of witnesses, for harassment of parties involved and even the culling of witnesses,” he said. He added that physically and psychologically challenged witnesses, such as the elderly, children and victims of sexual offences, are forced to relive their traumatic experiences, enduring robust cross-examination.
“This is a harsh and apathetic judicial environment for all categories of witnesses,” he said. He said by the time the preliminary enquiry is completed, months—and, often, years—have elapsed and the accused still has to wait for his trial, a wait which is all the more punitive because the accused is denied bail.
He said there would be the odd person who is innocent who remains incarcerated, awaiting his trial so he can be exonerated.
Volney said there was also concern over the late filing of indictments by the Director of Public Prosecutions over the years.
He said the delay in filing indictments has caused much chagrin, for the accused and their families, and also State agencies—such as the Office of the Ombudsman—that are being approached to assist with this “abhorrent situation”.
The proposed law, which required a three-fifths majority, was passed in the House of Representatives last night and will now make its way to the Senate for debate.
