-cites attorney Wade’s lack of authority to institute proceedings

By Richard Bhainie

THE Attorney General’s (AG) Chambers has filed an application seeking an order to strike out the case in the High Court involving the Haitians migrants who were allegedly ill-treated while in protective custody.
This application was filed on the grounds that attorney-at-law Darren Wade lacked authority to institute the proceedings. The proceedings were initially filed by private citizen Allandres Archer for and on behalf of the 26 Haitians, contending that a breach of their fundamental rights had occurred when they were placed in protective custody at the Hugo Chávez Centre for Rehabilitation and Reintegration in Onverwagt, Region Five (Mahaica-Berbice).
Archer, however, recently came forward claiming that he was unaware that he was the person bringing the action against the Attorney General; he has since withdrawn his name from the proceedings.

“I was contacted by Attorney-at Law Darren Wade to give an affidavit to be a witness and it ended up I was the person who was taking the government to court,” Archer said in a video recording released recently by the National Communications Network (NCN).
The Attorney General’s Chambers, in its application seeking a dismissal of the case, submitted to the court that Wade breached his duty as an attorney-at-law when he failed to inform Archer of the contents of the documents and the consequences of the execution of such documents before he (Archer) had signed it.
The AG’s Chambers further contended that the proceedings were instituted by Mr. Wade, a member of the legal profession, without the authority of the apparent respondent (Archer), which is so fundamental a flaw as to make the proceedings a nullity.

Archer, in the video recording, claimed that he was ‘tricked’ into signing the court documents, saying: “I never asked Darren Wade verbally or in any writing for him to represent me on behalf of any Haitians or anything and it end up I am the person taking the government to court, something I didn’t agree to.”
The AG’s Chambers further argued that given the fact that Wade’s authority to institute the proceedings is disputed, it is for him to prove he has lawful authority.
The court documents explained that on January 8, 2021, around 15:15hrs, Attorney General Anil Nandlall, S.C., had a telephone conversation with Wade pertaining to the matter.
During the said telephone conversation, Wade acknowledged and verified that it was Archer who was in the video recording, and explained that he (Wade) did not deal with the matter personally, but rather had his secretary address it.

The court was informed in the application that if Wade delegated his duty, then it is his responsibility to ensure that the person to whom he is delegating his duties, conforms with the proper protocols with which he is required to conform.
The Chief Justice (ag), Roxane George, on December 3, 2020, issued a conservatory order halting the deportation of the 26 Haitians in the action filed by Wade, contending that the order for deportation issued by the magistrate was arbitrary and in violation of the fundamental rights of his clients.
When questioned by the Chief Justice on December 18, 2020, on whether the Haitians are within the jurisdiction, Wade indicated that based on the instructions that he received, they had left Guyana.

This newspaper had reported that the foreign nationals, 10 men, nine women and seven children, had arrived in Guyana on November 7, 2020, and were reportedly granted a six-month stay. However, the Haitians allegedly gave incorrect information to immigration officers about where they would be staying while in the country, and days after, they were found at a city hotel and in a minibus on the Linden-Mabura Road, which constituted a violation of their stay.
The police claimed that they were suspected to be victims of a human- trafficking ring; an allegation the Haitians have consistently denied.

The court matter was fixed for ruling and/or clarification on January 27, 2021; the chief justice, during the hearing of the case on December 18, had asked the state to show how the 26 Haitians who were detained and ordered deported went from possible Trafficking in Persons (TIP) victims to ‘prohibited immigrants.’ The chief justice also asked the state for full disclosure of the treatment meted out to the Haitians while in the state’s care.
The Chief Justice had then denied Nandlall’s request to dismiss the case on the grounds that there were some “important questions” that the state must answer for future guidance and for preventing a recurrence.
She had said that what happened with the Haitians should never happen again and she is interested in finding out whether the procedures which have been put in place by law to deal with both TIP victims and prohibited migrants, had been followed.