Amidst controversy over whether the body of notorious murder convict and death-row inmate, Royden Williams, should have been handed over to his family or retained by the state for burial, Attorney General Anil Nandlall SC had said that it was the latter which had control of final rites.
The AG’s position is that the state kept custody of the body, as Williams, up to the time of his death, albeit was an escapee, remained a convicted prisoner and therefore at all material times remained within the custody of the state.
Contacted for legal clarity on the issue, a number of attorneys who wished not to be named, expressed to this newspaper that the AG’s position was not only legally sound, but also logical.
On May 19th, Williams called ‘Smallie’ who was serving nine death sentences, escaped from the high security block of the Mazaruni Prison.
It would be his second daring and well-organised escape from a penal facility, which has left prison and other higher ranking security officials struggling to provide answers for what were seen as obvious security breaches.
He was shot dead by a Joint Services team during an exchange of gun fire on Thursday, June 1st, within the 33 Miles, Potaro Road, Bartica area.
One attorney explained that Williams, because of his conviction and sentence, would have continued to remain in the custody of the state as he should have ordinarily been; notwithstanding his escape nor his subsequent death.
“He was a ward of the State until executed, which was to be carried out by the State, so it does make sense logically,” the lawyer said.
An examination of the Prison Act reveals that it caters for the “delivery of body to relatives.”
The relevant provision suggests that it is left to the discretion of the prison.
While it does not directly address a prisoner who died in the circumstances as Williams outside of the confines of the prison, the discretion seems to remain with the prison regarding the hand-over of the body of a prisoner to relatives for last rites.
The use of the term “may,” in the relevant provision, supports this.
Section 250, of the Act states that “Whenever the relatives of a prisoner who has died in prison of natural causes are desirous of having the body of such prisoner delivered to them for burial they shall apply to the officer in charge, who, on a certificate from the Medical Officer that it would not be injurious to the public health to grant such a request, may deliver up the body which shall be taken away by the relatives.”
It then adds that “The officer in charge may, however, in all cases supply a coffin for the burial of the deceased.”
The Act defines prisoner as, “any person whether convicted or not, under detention in any prison.
Another lawyer to whom this newspaper spoke said that because Williams was serving a sentence, notwithstanding from the report of the Joint Services that he did not die of natural causes as the Act specifically says, it is still left to the discretion of the prison whether or not the body is handed over to relatives.
The lawyer said that this discretion remains in effect even where the prisoner, as in Williams’ case, had pending appeals to his conviction.
According to the lawyer, once a sentence is being served, that person is in the custody of the state,” and would have so remained, even at the point of their death.
The Guyana Prison Service (GPS) had made clear its position on the matter that unless the convictions and sentences imposed upon Williams were set aside or reversed by a court of competent jurisdiction, his body was to remain with the prison authorities, as the law provides.
Appeals filed and pending against his multiple convictions and sentences did not affect that position, the GPS said.
While family members sought to pursue legal action, hoping that the process would have come to a halt and that they would be granted full custody of the body, that did not stop the prison service from executing their plan to dispose of the body.
Despite their attorney’s communication with the authorities, the body was cremated.
Williams’ family has accused members of the joint-services who led the operation to capture him, of cover-up of the true circumstances which led to his death, contending that suspicious marks were seen on his body.
They said that these marks were in addition to bullet wounds which the Joint Services said he sustained during the confrontation with him.
Following preparations for last rites, and despite objections and requests from the family, the Guyana Prison Service went ahead with its planned cremation of the body.
The family had said that in keeping with their religious beliefs, they specifically wanted a burial.
The Guyana Prison Service stated in a press release that the body remained in their jurisdiction by law.
A funeral service was held at the Memorial Gardens, Le Repentir, where the family was asked to provide a pastor to conduct the final rites. The body was then cremated in an automated system since the designated family member refused to push the button for ignition.
Williams’ sister had told the media at his funeral that when they viewed the body, they observed burn marks. The family said that since the body has been cremated they will seek legal action against the state. She strongly refuted claims made by the GPS that she had agreed to their course of action for her brother’s remains to be cremated.
Following the GPS decision to have the body cremated, the family retained attorney-at-law Nigel Hughes.
Williams was charged among other things, with a total of 23 counts of murder including the Lusignan and Bartica massacres. He was also found guilty of nine counts of murder inclusive of murder of women, children and the death of a Guyana Defence Force officer and sentenced to death on each count.
Two of his accomplices were killed after an exchange of gunfire with members of the Joint Services who were in pursuit. Williams was shot dead by a Joint Services team during an exchange of gunfire on Thursday, June 1, within the 33 Miles, Potaro Road, Bartica area.
