I read with great consternation that driver Delano Williams was freed of all charges that is, drunken driving and causing death by drunken driving. The latest report states that the DPP has appealed the decision by the acting Chief Magistrate and has asked for the charges to be reinstated. My question is why were the charges dropped? This is a simple case where someone was charged for causing death due to drunken driving then the logical end to this case should have been jail time for the offender, and something I’ve been advocating, substantial compensation for the dead man’s family. That’s why vehicles are insured the chief reason is to take care of these circumstances, his insurance pays for the accident so be it and let his premiums go up. Or if the insurer refuses to pay citing gross negligence on the driver’s part then have him sell his car and pay the fine.
The point I am making is the relatives must be compensated it is as simple as that, case closed. Now, here is the catch and it has to do with the same compensation issue. I am getting a strong feeling here that the relatives may have settled the matter out of court having received a monetary settlement from the offender.   Instead of suffering the ignominy of having the royal runaround with these endless court proceedings when in most instances the family of the deceased gets nothing. Then, the relatives would have said to themselves why go through the pains lets accept a settlement it’s at least something. The relatives would have been coerced into accepting what we would say in Guyanese parlance “thank Gad for small mercies.” Hence the magistrate was forced to dismiss the charges. Not so fast, isn’t there a law barring one from making a plea of this nature? Settling a matter on behalf of a dead spouse/relative is not the prerogative of the living that, from my limited legal knowledge must be the expressed intention of the victim in the form of a written statement or some other legal document. In this case the victim is dead and the living cannot speak on his behalf. The only thing we can do is to seek justice. Certainly, no one wants to die especially in such horrible circumstances and to think that a monetary contribution on the part of the offender can measure to the value of a life. Therefore the learned magistrate should have proceeded with this case and see to it that a conviction is upheld.

It is on matters of this nature that I make a renewed call that Guyana establishes a Small Claims Court. I read of so many court matters petty and small in nature such as neighbours cussing neighbour, petty theft and irritating non paying tenants all simple offences that could easily be taken care of in a Small Claims Court setting. These are now left to burden the normal courts when weightier matters like the one outlined above should be dealt with there.