It has come to the attention of the Office of the Chancellor that Justice Rabi Sukul , a Judge of the Court of Appeal of Guyana, was on February 3rd 2014, disbarred by the Bar Council of England and Wales.
A statement from the Office of the Chancellor today said that Justice Sukul last week applied for and was granted special leave “to attend to urgent personal matters in the United Kingdom.” Yesterday, news of the disbarment came to the attention of the acting Chancellor of the Judiciary, Carl Singh who sought and obtained from Justice Sukul confirmation of his disbarment. The acting Chancellor has requested the immediate resignation of Justice Sukul who has undertaken to do so.
The England and Wales Bar Standards Board says that Sukul was disbarred for intentionally misleading his client by drafting false grounds of appeal.
A statement on its website follows:
A public disciplinary tribunal has this week ordered the disbarment of a barrister for intentionally misleading his client by drafting false grounds of appeal – despite knowing there were none.
The tribunal panel heard that Mr Rabi Sukul, of Balham Chambers, London, drafted a document to the Court of Appeal setting out initial grounds for an appeal on behalf of his client who had been convicted of drugs-related offences.
Mr Sukul then failed to set out these grounds in detail, despite being requested to do so by the Court of Appeal.
The tribunal heard that Mr Sukul had acted with “the intention of misleading the client”.
The independent five-person tribunal, chaired by His Honour Michael Baker QC, found by a unanimous verdict that Mr Sukul had intentionally misled his client and engaged in conduct likely to bring the barristers’ profession into disrepute.
Head of Professional Conduct at the Bar Standards Board, Sara Down said: “Our duty as a regulator is, first and foremost, to protect the public and safeguard the client. Because of his behaviour, Mr Sukul not only potentially gave his client false hope of a possible appeal against his conviction, but acted counter to his obligation not to knowingly or recklessly mislead the court. For the public to have confidence in the justice system, they must be able to have confidence in the person representing them. We believe that the independent panel has made absolutely the right decision.”
The hearing took place on Monday 3 February 2014.
ENDS
Notes to editors
Mr Sukul was called to the Bar by Lincoln’s Inn, July 1988. He was not present at the hearing.
The panel heard that Mr Sukul’s aforementioned client had originally been found guilty of drugs-related offences at Snaresbrook Crown Court and sentenced to a Young Offenders Institute.
——————————-
When he was sworn in, Sukul had told reporters here that he was bringing from England 25 years of legal practice “in a jurisdiction that is probably framed (with) local jurisprudence, that I think is potentially quite helpful”. He said that he intends to apply the legal principles as well as law and logic and good, sound, objective judicial reasoning, which he has learnt during his practice in the United Kingdom, and will apply them to his native land.
Justice Sukul said Guyana’s judicial system is unique as it is not open to criticism like the United Kingdom. He said he had seen shortcomings there for many years and had complained about them.
Sukul’s disbarment will raise questions about how the Judicial Service Commission went about its due diligence in this instance.
Justice of Appeal Rabi Sukul taking the oath of office before President Donald Ramotar in July last year (SN file photo)
