00:00It's week two of the state of emergency and just as many legal challenges have
00:04already been brought against the SOE regulations. This time, Attorney Gerald
00:10Ramdeen is challenging the constitutionality of the gun amnesty
00:14provision. Under the Constitution, the only body that has the
00:19authority to grant an immunity is the Director of Public Prosecution. Under
00:25Section 90 of the Constitution. Section 90 of the Constitution by virtue of
00:30Section 54 of the Constitution is one of those heavily entrenched sections of the
00:36Constitution meaning that you need a two-thirds majority in both houses of
00:39Parliament. Ramdeen is making it clear that he is not against a gun amnesty but
00:44neither is he in support. It is a dangerous proposition to inform the
00:51public and plant the seed of an expectation that if you have an illegal
00:56firearm and you have illegal explosives or you have illegal ammunition in your
01:00possession and you come forward and deliver it voluntarily to the
01:05authorities that you will be granted an immunity from prosecution and it is a
01:10very dangerous and risky proposition that one, somebody can accept that
01:18expectation, act on the expectation, deliver up their firearm and then be
01:24faced with prosecution. As a matter of law, all I was concerned about is the
01:29legality of it. Regulation 11 is but one of the regulations deemed unlawful and
01:34unconstitutional in Ramdeen's legal estimation. The regulation that provides
01:39an immunity to people who act during the state of emergency, that is the public
01:44authorities, the police, the regiment, that gives them the immunity from suit
01:49meaning not to be sued. I think that is unlawful. The regulation that denies bail
01:54and denies any detainee the opportunity to get to go to court and
02:00seek a writ of habeas corpus, I think that is absolutely unlawful. He notes
02:04that taxpayers had to foot a hefty legal bill following the 2011 SOE for some of
02:11these very said reasons. Ramdeen says the Attorney General has responded
02:15positively to his pre-action protocol letter. The response of the Attorney
02:21General was to confirm that regulation 11 is not yet in effect, will not be in
02:30effect until he provides a substantive response to my pre-action letter. He gave
02:34an undertaking that they will not trigger the provision while they are
02:37seeking advice because he said that the pre-action letter was to use his
02:44description was very helpful. Ramdeen says he's hopeful that the Attorney
02:48General will consider the regulations as a whole and make the necessary
02:52adjustments. TV6 News has reached out to the office of the Attorney General for
02:57a response. The regulation dealing with the immunity from suit and the
03:02regulation dealing with the denial of bail and the denial of habeas corpus
03:08if that is not looked at by the time that he replies to me as promised within
03:14seven days, yes, you can expect definitely that there will be a
03:17challenge to those as well. Renassa Cutting, TV6 News.
Comments