THE Court of Appeal on Wednesday discharged a stay of proceedings granted by Justice of Appeal Dawn Gregory on July 26, 2017 in relation to the Jennifer Westford and Margaret Cummings criminal cases.

Justice Gregory had granted an order stopping the magisterial proceeding in the matter against former Minister of Public Service, Dr. Jennifer Westford in relation to eight state vehicles for which she has been charged with forgery of documents and attempting to transfer same to other persons.

Dr. Westford of Lot 55 ‘AA’ Victoria Avenue, Eccles, East Bank Demerara (EBD) and Margaret Cummings, former Personnel Officer at the Ministry of Public Service and of Lot 709 Section ‘A’ Diamond, EBD, were on trial before City Magistrate Fabayo Azore for the charges.

Attorneys for the duo were forced to take the motion to the Court of Appeal following a High Court ruling to quash a Constitutional Motion to examine the issue of amnesty. The order granted also prevented the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and police from prosecuting the two women until the Appeal Court proceedings is completed.
In August 2015, the former minister was placed on a total of $800,000 bail after she pleaded not guilty to the charges, which state that between July 17, 2014 and June 23, 2015, she attempted to transfer eight state-owned vehicles to four persons.

Westford’s former aide, Margaret Cummings was also slapped with four counts of forgery. Cummings also pleaded not guilty to four charges which alleged that she forged documents for the purchase of the eight motor vehicles. She was also released on a total of $1.2M bail.

The Stay of Proceedings was appealed by the Attorney General (AG) to the full bench of the Court of Appeal. The AG called for the orders granted by Justice Gregory to be discharged or varied, and to grant any such other order as it deems fit.

Justices of Appeal Rishi Persaud, Arif Bulkan and Rafeek Khan heard arguments Monday by Solicitor-General Kim Kyte. She argued on behalf of the State that Justice Gregory, the lone judge in Chambers of the Court of Appeal was without jurisdiction to grant the aforementioned orders. Kyte argued too that there was no appeal pending before the court in relation to the criminal matters pending before the Magistrate’s court.
Kyte noted that the only appeal which the court was charged with is an appeal from the order of Justice Cummings and the stay of that order was refused. As a result, the solicitor-general argued that no appeal existed.

Additionally, she posited that a stay ought not to have been granted since the filed appeal had little prospect of success. Kyte argued that the principles governing the court’s power and discretion in granting and refusing a stay of execution pending appeal are trite and the appellant must show that the case put before the court has merit.
As such, she told the court that Justice Cummings-Edwards exercised her discretion judicially in refusing to grant the Orders Nisi as requested by Westford and Cummings in their appeal.

Moreover, it was argued that the DPP acted lawfully in prosecuting the criminal charges and noted that there are no exceptional circumstances in the said matter which warrants judicial intervention in the DPP’s discretion as exercised.
The applicant, the solicitor-general said was before the Magistrate’s Court, and its jurisdiction has been properly invoked, therefore, the criminal matter ought to be permitted to run its course.

Westford and Cummings were represented by Dexter Todd. Todd argued that Justice Gregory had properly exercised her discretion in granting the stay of proceedings. The court nevertheless discharged the stay of proceedings and provided the reliefs sought by the State.