The disappearance of key documents in the rape case against Muslim scholar Nezaam Ali is currently being looked at by the Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), but it is unclear at this point if any effort is being made to replace the documents or ascertain who took them.
Since the documents were discovered missing several weeks ago there have been calls for a thorough investigation to be conducted to not only ensure that Ali has his day in court, but also to ascertain when the documents were removed and by whom.
Liz Rahaman, the DPP Chambers’ Communications Officer, told Sunday Stabroek late last week that the nine files were at the office and were being looked out. She could not say when they arrived.
Ali was charged in 2012 with raping nine boys and was committed to stand trial the following year. Shortly after the committal, his lawyer Nigel Hughes filed an action in the High Court to have the committal overturned. This was rejected by the court and it was ruled that the committal will remain.
It was the mother of three of the boys who recently informed this newspaper about the missing documents, which she had heard of months earlier but was not getting any help to confirm. She had heard about the missing documents while at her place of worship and this was the reason she knew it was true.
The woman, who is also a Muslim, told this newspaper that she in the company of an official from the Child Care and Protection Agency (CCPA) visited the Supreme Court to check on the case. A clerk showed them the case files but the medical certificates of the boys along with their birth certificates were missing. Her boys are now aged 15, 13 and 11.
While fighting back tears, she had explained that it was on the insistence of a CCPA official that the collection officer (name given) at the Vigilance Court sent the files to the Supreme Court. She said that after realizing that the documents were missing, the clerk was asked what the next step was and he informed that the Registrar will have to make a note and send the files to the Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). The woman said that based on her understanding the DPP would then send the files to court but she was not told for what reason.
She expressed certainty that the documents were removed after Ali lost his bid to have the High Court overturn his committal.
The frustrated mother had expressed concerns about DPP Shalimar Ali-Hack being involved in the review of the matter given that she and Ali were from the same religious background. The DPP had been accused of meddling in the case but had denied those claims.
The boys’ mother said that for months she has tried to get the attention of several key government officials. She has written to President David Granger but is yet to receive a response. She also visited the Ministry of Social Protection, while Volda Lawrence was minister and Minister of Public Security Khemraj Ramjattan but got no help.
The charges alleged that Ali of 268 Section ‘C’ 5 South Turkeyen, between December 2011 and January 2012, being a teacher attached to the Turkeyen Masjid, engaged in sexual activity with the children, abusing a position of trust. He was placed on a total of $1,300,000 bail.
The allegations of the abuse first came to light when the CCPA received an anonymous tip and officials there began an investigation that led them to the boys, who were then between the ages of four and ten.
The police were informed of the situation and after the boys were examined, Ali, who was employed with the Central Islamic Organisation of Guyana, was arrested, released on station bail and subsequently charged. Ali was also sent on leave, pending the outcome of the case.
A group of child rights advocates have since called for an investigation into the disappearance of the documents from the case files and said that no one should be exempted.
Based on what several legal minds have explained the DPP does not have to get involved at this stage since Ali has been committed. The man now falls within the jurisdiction of the High Court, this newspaper was told.
Registrar of the Supreme Court Susanna Lovell has declined to give a comment and this newspaper is still awaiting a comment from newly appointed Minister of Social Protection Amna Ally. The last word from Ally’s office was that she has requested some information from the DPP and was awaiting a response.
The legal minds, that spoke to this newspaper expressed confidence that the case can be salvaged by a thorough investigation and the introduction of secondary evidence.
One lawyer said that the court has the power to call before it the magistrate who presided over the case, the clerk who dealt with the matter, the clerk of court and the prosecutor for an explanation as to what has become of the documents.
According to the attorney, the court can go through a process to ensure that replacement copies are sourced and these become secondary pieces of evidence, which can be used in the trial.
