Court Rules – By Latrishka Thomas
Court Rules Prisoner Was
A High Court judge has found that an inmate at His Majesty’s Prison was held unlawfully for an extended period after authorities repeatedly failed to bring him physically before a Magistrate as required by law, with the prisoner going nearly two months at one point without a proper court appearance despite being on remand.
The ruling was delivered on February 23 in the case of Wayne Worrell, who filed an application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus and constitutional relief.
Worrell was arrested on August 1, 2024 for a serious offence and charged the following day. He was brought before a Magistrate on August 7 and remanded until August 14. From that date until October 8, he was never once physically brought before a Magistrate for a further remand hearing, despite the law requiring this to happen at intervals of no more than eight clear days.
He was eventually brought before a Magistrate again on October 9 and remanded until October 16. Although remand warrants were signed by Magistrates, Worrell was never actually seen by one during the period from October 17 through to December 3, 2024 when the High Court intervened and ordered that he be brought before a Magistrate forthwith, either in person or virtually. He appeared before a Magistrate the very next day in compliance with that order.
At the heart of the case is section 239 of the Magistrates Code of Procedure Act, which requires that a defendant in custody be physically brought before a Magistrate and that remand periods must not exceed eight clear days. The court ruled on December 3 that this provision required physical appearance not merely the administrative signing of remand warrants in the prisoner’s absence.
The court declared that Worrell’s detention from October 17, 2024 to December 3rd, 2024 was unlawful and in breach of section 5 of the Constitution of Antigua and Barbuda.
The court awarded Worrell $5000 in nominal damages and a further $5000 in vindicatory damages. The Respondents – the Commissioner of Police, the Superintendent of Prisons, and the Attorney General – were also ordered to pay interest on the nominal damages award at a rate of three percent per annum from December 3, 2024 until the date of judgment, and post-judgment interest on the total damages award at five percent per annum until payment is made. Costs were also awarded to Worrell, to be assessed if not agreed within twenty-one days.
In a provision of the order, the court directed that if Worrell remains incarcerated at the time payment is made, the damages shall be paid into court and held to his credit, to be released only upon his written directions to the Registrar of the High Court or upon a further court order.
The application for the issue of a Writ of Habeas Corpus which would have required his immediate release, was dismissed, as was the remainder of his claims for relief.
