Dear Editor,
I noticed today in your online edition a follow-up story on the Barry Dataram legal saga, which I was paying quite keen attention to whilst it was engaging the attention of the high court, Honourable Justice Jainarayan Singh presiding.
Admittedly, I was very surprised at the rulings of Justice Jainaryan Singh in granting Dataram bail in the circumstances, but I am sure the respected judge had very good reasons for so doing. Hence my query today. Has the judge provided a written rationale for arriving at such a ruling? Is he obliged to display to the people of Guyana and moreso his professional contemporaries, reasons for so ruling?
As far as I know, our jurisprudence is precedent based. What are the implications for future cases on extradition?
The US government must have had much more than sufficient evidence to link Barry Dataram to drug smuggling to have requested his extradition. Do judges consider the public interest in such cases?
All in all, Dataram has now vanished, which I suppose was what he was planning all along.
His lawyer is adamant he has not breached any court order. Even so, after a wanted bulletin has been posted, does he not have a duty now to present himself to the Guyana Police Force? How can this continued absence be justified by this lawyer?
Does the Guyana Police Force have the capability to mount 24 hour surveillance of suspects or persons of interest? This whole situation smacks of rank absurdity. Guyana has failed in the end once again through the shortcomings of its judicial and security personnel.
I hope the written ruling of Justice Jainarayan Singh appears soon for debate among legal scholars.
Yours faithfully,
Vincent T Etwaroo
