Bath Settlement protest Forty in court

Forty persons who appeared separately at the Blairmont Magistrate’s Court yesterday charged with “assembling in a public way for disorderly purpose” were sent on their own bail following arguments by three attorneys.

It is alleged that on January 28 at Bath Settlement, West Berbice Surujpaul Kowchai, Kennrick Duggin, Deochan Manroop, Sooklall Seelall and Sarju Rampersaud among others, assembled for disorderly purposes and did not disperse or move away when requested by Superintendent of Police, Balram Persaud.

There was a heavy police presence outside the court as the defendants, comprising mainly cane-harvesters at-tached to the Blairmont Estate, had planned to solicit the support of staff members from different departments of the estate to stage a picketing exercise if the charges were not dropped.

The defendants who were represented by attorneys-at-law Anil Nandlall, Jailall Kissoon and Khemraj Ramjattan, pleaded not guilty. Arguing for more than half an hour in the packed courtroom, the lawyers entered a no-case submission and made an application for the charges to be withdrawn.

Magistrate Tejnarine Ramroop released the defendants on their own bail and adjourned the matter to February 7 for report at the Fort Wellington Court.

Nandlall emphasized that the defendants who were merely demonstrating their support to the families of the slain Lusignan victims were subjected to justice while the killers are enjoying their freedom.

He said his instructions were that the persons were not arrested at the assembly but in the streets, rum shops and the dispensary and thrown into the cramped lock-ups. The lawyer added that a woman had just arrived from Suriname and did not have knowledge of what was taking place but she, too, was arrested along with a foreman who was behind his desk.

He urged the court to take into account that his clients did not cause harm to persons or property but yet they were beaten, tear-gassed and shot at with pellets by the police.

Nandlall further argued that his clients were informed orally that they would have to attend court and they came voluntarily, noting that they have no intention of fleeing the jurisdiction.

At this stage Kissoon requested to see one of the jackets and observed that the summons was not properly issued. He said the charge is bad in law and in that case the persons should not have been in court.

He said too that “one man alone cannot assemble for the purpose of a common design” but the charges should have stated that the defendants acted in concert. Further he argued that this is the first time he had heard of persons being charged when they are “gathered to mourn the dead.”

In his arguments, Ramjattan told the court that he adopted the arguments of Nandlall and Kissoon and congratulated the latter for recognizing why the charges need to be dismissed.

Magistrate Ramroop queried whether any of the protestors on the East Coast were arrested or if permission had to be granted for persons to protest and the lawyer responded in the negative.

“No person should be hindered in his right to a peaceful assembly. They have a right to assemble and to speak their issues,” Ramjattan said. He informed the magistrate however, that written permission needs to be granted for a public procession.

In response to the arguments, police prosecutor, Sergeant Donna Grant-Fraser requested an adjournment to reply and for the persons to be placed on reasonable bail.

The defendants who had earlier smiled and nodded their heads in approval showed their discontentment when the prosecutor asked that they be placed on bail.

Present in court too was Chairman of Region Five, Harrinarine Baldeo and Chandra Narine Sharma of CNS, Channel Six. At the end of the session, Sharma urged the defendants to continue the struggle and said he would return to “follow up” on the issue.