The Court of Appeal has affirmed a directive by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Shalimar Ali-Hack, SC, for US-based Guyanese Marcus Bisram to be committed to stand trial for the October 2016 murder of Berbice carpenter Faiyaz Narinedatt, whose lifeless body was found on the roadway. In the unanimous decision delivered on Monday by acting Chancellor of the Judiciary Justice Yonette Cummings-Edwards, the appeal court overturned an order of certiorari quashing the DPP’s directive which was granted by the High Court in June 2020.
An oral request for a stay of the judgement by Bisram’s lawyer, Arduranauth Gossai, was declined by the Court of Appeal. As such, Gossai is likely to hand over his murder accused client to the Police. Bisram will then be placed on remand pending the hearing and determination of his trial at the High Court in Berbice. In the meantime, Gossai has also given oral notice of his intention to appeal the decision of the Court of Appeal at the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).
Certiorari
In June 2020, High Court Judge Simone Morris-Ramlall issued an order of certiorari quashing the directive by Ali-Hack to Magistrate Renita Singh for Bisram to be committed to stand trial for the capital offence in the High Court. Justice Morris-Ramlall had also granted an order prohibiting the DPP from bringing an indictment for murder against Bisram in the High Court.
Dead: Faiyaz Narinedatt
Bisram was released from prison where he had been on remand. Magistrate Singh had discharged the charge against Bisram and informed him that he was free to go, following a Preliminary Inquiry (PI) on March 30, 2020. At the close of the PI, the Magistrate found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against him.
However, on the day of the discharge, the DPP exercised her powers under Section 72 (1) and (2) (ii) (b) of the Criminal Law (Procedure) Act, by requesting that the depositions be sent to her and directed the Magistrate to reopen the PI with a view of committing Bisram. The Magistrate complied and thereafter called on Bisram, who had been rearrested to lead a defence.
Chancellor (ag) Justice Yonette Cummings-Edwards
At the close of the case for the defence, the Magistrate found that there was insufficient evidence to support the charge and adjourned the matter to April 6, 2020, for further directions from the DPP. On April 6, 2020, the DPP directed that Bisram be committed to stand trial in the High Court. This direction was duly complied with on the said date by the Magistrate. Bisram then moved to the High Court seeking judicial review of the DPP’s directive.
In ruling that the DPP’s directive for committal was unlawful and unreasonable, Justice Morris-Ramlall, among other things, held that the evidence disclosed against Bisram by the prosecution did not meet the required evidentiary threshold to support calling on him to lead a defence.
In fact, the Judge ruled that no prima facie case had been made out against him to put him on trial by a jury before a Judge. “…The evidence is insufficient, or, in other words, it is not of the quality that a reasonable jury properly directed could safely convict on it.”
Ali-Hack then filed an appeal against Justice Morris-Ramlall’s decision with the appeal court.
Jury trial
Justice Cummings-Edwards underscored that the issues raised in this appeal would be better ventilated at the trial court by a jury. “The issues raised, we think, would have been better ventilated at the trial court where the trial Judge would have weighed all the issues in relation to the evidence and decide whether or not it would have been left for a jury,” she said.
According to the Chancellor, “The decision to commit by the Magistrate would have had to be based on the evidence which the DPP ought to have reviewed… We are of the view that the committal proceedings by the Magistrate and the directive by the Director of Public Prosecutions would not have been invalid,” Justice Cummings-Edwards noted.
In her ruling, Justice Morris-Ramlall had outlined that the evidence of Chaman Chunilall was the body and soul of the prosecution’s case against Bisram and that there was no other evidence, either direct or circumstantial linking him to the murder charge.
“At the close of the case for the prosecution, the evidence of Chunilall was totally discredited and rendered manifestly unreliable. The evidence remained substantially the same at the close of the case for the defence,” the High Court Judge had said.
However, citing a plethora of case laws, the appeal court in adopting the pronouncements therein held, “It is not the Judge’s job to weigh the evidence and to decide who is telling the truth and to stop the case merely because he thinks the witness is lying. To do that is to usurp the functions of the jury…”
Evidence sufficient
The DPP had always maintained that her directive for committal was lawful as there is sufficient evidence against Bisram to warrant a trial by a jury before a Judge. In fact, during the appeal hearing, Ali-Hack submitted that the evidence in the case against Bisram is sufficient, and any reasonable jury, if properly directed, can safely convict.
The DPP said that the evidence given by Chunilall was admissible and the issue that arises is the issue of credibility, which is for a jury to decide. “This is a proper case for a committal, for it to go to trial in the High Court,” Ali-Hack said as she urged the court to quash the High Court’s ruling.
Bisram had contended that the DPP’s directive infringed his constitutional rights provided for in Articles 122 (a) and 144 (1) of the Constitution of Guyana and the separation of powers doctrine. However, this contention was rejected by the Court of Appeal which held that the DPP, in making the directive, acted within the ambit of powers invested in her under the Constitution and statute.
Extradition
Bisram was extradited from the United States to Guyana in 2019 to face the murder charge. There was an extended fight in US courts to block his extradition. He was then charged and remanded to prison for the murder of Narinedatt, a father of two, of Number 72 Village Corentyne, Berbice.
It is alleged that on the day of the killing, Bisram had a party at his home which Narinedatt and others attended. Media reports are that Narinedatt went to the yard and was followed by Bisram, who reportedly came up behind him and started “feeling him up.”
It was reported that Narinedatt slapped and chucked Bisram, who allegedly directed his friends to kill him. According to reports, several men beat the carpenter and dumped his body on the Number 70 Village Corentyne, Berbice road.
It was reported that they then drove over his body on the roadway at Number 70 village Corentyne, Berbice to make it appear like a vehicular accident.
Five other men: Orlando Dickie, Radesh Motie, Diodath Datt, Harri Paul Parsram, and Niran Yacoob are currently awaiting trial at the High Court in Berbice for Narinedatt’s murder. (G1)
