The legal minds in the opposition camp might be referencing an inappropriate law in challenging the legality of serving two defendant summonses to a US-based Guyanese government critic, Rickford Burke. At least this is according to Guyana’s Attorney General (AG) and Legal Affairs Minister, Anil Nandlall.
He said that many of the arguments proffered by some aligned with the opposition hinge on a statute unrelated to the extortion charge against Burke, the President of the Caribbean Guyana Institute for Democracy (CGID). He noted that contrary to their assertions, the offence of extortion is indictable, and individuals accused of this violation, regardless of where they are, cannot escape the “long arm” of the law.
In his recent “Issues in the News” programme, Nandlall expounded on the differences between the two statutes, the Summary Jurisdiction Magistrate Court Act and the Criminal Law Procedure Act.
He said that those who contend that the service was unconstitutional and out of the jurisdiction of the court, seem to have relied on the Summary Jurisdiction Magistrate Court Act Chapter 3:05.
Section 68 (1) of that Act says, “All summonses, warrants, orders, judgments, writs of execution, or other process or proceedings, whether civil or criminal, issued or taken by or by the authority of any magistrate respecting any matter within his jurisdiction shall have full force and effect, and may be served or executed, **anywhere within Guyana** by a bailiff of the court, by the police or other constable to whom they are directed, or by any other police or other constable, as the case may be.”
The preposition phrase “_Anywhere within Guyana_” appears to be the bone of contention by those opposed to the service of the summonses. Nandlall hastened to add that even if Burke was charged with violating this law, it still does not explicitly say summonses **cannot** be served outside of the country. Regardless, according to Nandlall, Burke is accused of committing an indictable crime that falls under the Criminal Law Procedure Act, which places no restrictions on the service of summonses.
Section 48 of that law says inter alia, “Every magistrate may issue a summons or warrant as hereinafter mentioned to compel the appearance of an accused person before him for the purpose of preliminary inquiry, in any of the following cases:
“(a) if the person is accused of having committed in any place whatever an indictable offence triable in Guyana, and is, or is suspected to be, within the limits in which the magistrate has jurisdiction, or resides or is suspected to reside within those limits; or “(b) if he, wherever he may be, is accused of having committed an indictable offence within those limits, or on any journey during any part of which he has passed through them…”
The Attorney General further emphasized that it is only logical that recourse exist to prosecute individuals accused of committing a crime in one country and fleeing/residing in another. According to him, this principle is more a matter of ‘common sense’ than law. He argued that claiming there is no avenue to hold such individuals accountable would be tantamount to incompetence.
“But the law is not an ass… They can’t even get the law right! They’re going under the wrong statute. Summary Jurisdiction deals with Summary Offenses. These are indictable offences. Burke was not charged under the Summary Jurisdiction Act. And these lawyers are writing in the newspapers and they’re not even reading and understanding what they are writing. So, the act that they are relying on is completely wrong! It is completely irrelevant,” the AG stressed.
DICTATORSHIP
Since the service of the two summonses by a US Process Server, Mark Wesserman, in the presence of a Guyanese cop, ASP Rodwell Sarabo, Burke, has intensified his criticism of the Guyanese government.
He has denied receipt of the documents but instead, said that he was confronted by gunmen sent by the PPP/C government. He later posted on his Facebook page that the New York Police Department (NYPD) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) are probing the matter. The Guyana Police Force (GPF), however, which claims to have contacted the NYPD, informed the Guyanese media corp that no such report was filed by Burke.
The defiant CGID head is now claiming that the Irfaan Ali-led government wants to silence him, warning of an emerging dictatorship.
But Nandlall begs to differ. He underscored that nothing about the service constitutes a dictatorship. In fact, nonservice and charged in absentia would fit that label.
“I thought that if the trial proceeded without him being served and was sentenced in his absence and denied an opportunity to defend himself, and denied an opportunity to have a fair trial, I thought that those omissions will constitute a miscarriage of justice and can lend to the allegation that there is authoritarianism. But the State is bending over backwards to ensure that this defendant is made aware of the charges and the proceedings, so that he can make himself present,” Nandlall said.
He added, “If he is so convinced that he is right and the allegations that he is making is sound or that he has not committed the offences for which he is being charged – then come and defend the proceedings!”
The Guyana Police Force back in September 2022, issued a wanted bulletin for Burke’s arrest in relation to a case of extortion. Two reporters, Gary Eleazer and Alex Wayne, were subsequently charged during a reported “sting operation”. Burke is accused of “conspiracy to commit a felony to wit publication of defamatory libel in order to extort money.”
The CGID Head is reported to have been the mastermind behind the plot to extort a businessman in exchange for the removal of an alleged libelous article published by an outfit called the Guyana News Network (GNN).
