Bisram freed of murder charge by CCJ
Marcus Bisram
Marcus Bisram

-can be rearrested and charged if ‘fresh’ evidence surfaces

GUYANESE-American businessman, Marcus Bisram, was, on Tuesday, freed from a murder charge, after the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) found that Section 72 of the Criminal Law (Procedure) Act which empowers the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to direct a magistrate to commit an accused to stand trial, violates the separation of powers and is inconsistent with Articles 122A and 144 of the Constitution.

Bisram, who was accused of the 2016 murder of Berbice carpenter, Faiyaz Narinedatt, through his attorney-at-law, Darshan Ramdhanie, QC, had moved to the Trinidad-based court for judicial review. The ruling of this court is final as it is Guyana’s last court of resort.

Ramdhanie had asked the court to strike down Section 72 (1) and (2) (ii) (b) of the Criminal Law (Procedure) Act, which empowers DPP Shalimar Ali-Hack, S.C., to, inter alia, direct a magistrate to commit an accused person to stand trial in circumstances where the said magistrate, after conducting a preliminary inquiry, discharged that accused person.

The lawyer’s position was that the section of the Act upon which the DPP had based her directive was unlawful, as it infringed upon Bisram’s constitutional rights, as provided for by Articles 122 (A) and 144 (1) of the Constitution of Guyana, and the Separation of Powers doctrine.

CCJ President, Justice Adrian Saunders

The unanimous decision was delivered virtually on Tuesday afternoon, by the President of the CCJ, Justice Adrian Saunders, who agreed with Ramdhanie’s submissions and allowed Bisram’s appeal.

The court found that it would be “unjust,” in all of the circumstances, for Bisram to be made to answer any charge of murder on the same evidence as was presented to the magistrate and on which he was freed twice.

“However, because Bisram, at least in terms of the law, was never placed in jeopardy, nothing prevents the DPP from having him re-arrested and charged again if fresh evidence was obtained linking him to the alleged murder,” Justice Saunders said.

In relation to Section 72, Saunders said that the court noted that, simply striking down the said section, would leave a substantial gap in the criminal procedure and an indefinite uncertainty as to when that gap will be closed.

Against that backdrop, the CCJ president said that, until the National Assembly addresses that matter, Section 72 should be modified to provide that a DPP may place before a judge of the Supreme Court, the depositions and other materials that were before the magistrate, on an ex-parte application for the discharged accused to be arrested and committed, if the judge is of the view that the material justifies such a course of action.

According to Justice Saunders, Bisram had already been seriously prejudiced by “the bungling” that transpired in the magistrate’s court, that even if he had been acquitted at a trial, the right of appeal by the DPP was a very limited one and that the evidence against Bisram had been characterised both by the magistrate and the judge as being weak and insufficient.

In those circumstances, the judge said it will be unjust for Bisram to be made to answer any charge of murder in the case as it stands.

Director of Public Prosecutions, Shalimar Ali-Hack

“Of course, the loved ones of Faiyaz Narinedatt also deserve justice. There is no question of barring the DPP from ever preferring a charge of murder against Bisram for the death of Mr Narinedatt. If the prosecutorial authorities were to obtain fresh evidence linking Bisram to the alleged murder, then there will be nothing to prevent the DPP from having him re- arrested and again charged,” he added.

The CCJ ordered that the decision of the magistrate to discharge Bisram be restored and that he may not be committed for trial only on the evidence led before the magistrate.

As the proceedings came to an end, the court scheduled timelines for written submissions on costs after which a ruling will be made.

On May 31, 2021, the Court of Appeal ruled in favour of a case filed by the DPP to challenge the decision made by Justice Simone Morris-Ramlall on June 1, 2020, to free Bisram.

Justice Morris-Ramlall had granted several orders, which led to Bisram’s release. The first one granted was for the quashing of the decision the DPP made on or about March 30, 2020, directing Magistrate Renita Singh to reopen the preliminary inquiry into the charge against Bisram, with a view to committing him for the said charge, on the grounds that the decision of the DPP was unreasonable, unlawful, and made by ignoring relevant considerations and ultra vires.

The second was an Order of Certiorari for the quashing of the decision of the DPP, directing Magistrate Singh to commit Bisram for trial in the High Court. Additionally, the judge granted an order which prohibited the DPP from proffering an indictment in the High Court charging Bisram.

Following the judge’s ruling, Bisram walked out of the Camp Street Prison on June 2, 2020, after the final documents were signed.

Dissatisfied with the turn of events, the DPP then moved to the Court of Appeal, seeking to overturn the ruling. In delivering the court’s unanimous decision in May, Chancellor (ag) of the Judiciary, Yonette Cummings-Edwards said: “We are of the view that the committal proceedings by the magistrate, and the direction by the Director of Public Prosecutions would not have been invalid.”

In the circumstances, Bisram had to turn himself over to the police, and was placed on remand to stand trial for the capital offence of murder before the High Court.

Bisram is accused of being the mastermind in Narinedatt’s murder which occurred on October 31, 2016. His body was found on the Number 70 Village Public Road in Berbice.

The next day, police arrested his alleged assailants, who subsequently confessed that the flamboyant Bisram had ordered them to commit the killing. It is alleged that it was because the carpenter spurned his sexual advances that Bisram ordered the hit on him.

Bisram had returned to the United States after the crime was committed, but was extradited to Guyana in November 2019, after spending over two years in prison.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE :
Facebook
Twitter
WhatsApp

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All our printed editions are available online
emblem3
Subscribe to the Guyana Chronicle.
Sign up to receive news and updates.
We respect your privacy.