Law change: DPP stripped of powers to direct Magistrates following CCJ’s ruling in Marcus Bisram case

By Editor On Apr 24, 2023

Powers once conferred on the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to instruct a Magistrate to reopen cases for retrial after a decision is handed down were removed on Monday with amendments to the Criminal Law (Procedure) Act.

The Amendment Bill 2022 was inspired by a decision of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) in the case of Marcus Bisram against the Director Public Prosecutions (DPP).

Bisram was charged with murder and his preliminary inquiry was concluded by a magistrate at the Springlands Magistrates’ Court after months of delays.

At the conclusion of the preliminary inquiry, the Magistrate found that a prima facie case was not made out against Bisram for him to stand trial before a judge and jury in the High Court and discharged him.

Not happy with the decision and using 72 of the Criminal Law (Procedure) Act, the DPP instructed the magistrate to send the depositions taken in the case and later instructed the magistrate to reopen the preliminary inquiry and re-commit Bisram.

Appealed at the level of the CCJ, the apex court determined that Section 72 amounts to an unlawful fetter and called on Guyana’s National Assembly to modify the legislation.

Attorney General Anil Nandlall opened the debate on the repeal of the section of law on Monday.

He was happy that with support from the opposition benches, no longer are magistrates bound to carry out all or any directions given to them by the DPP under Section 72.

Nandlall told the House that before drafting the Bill, the Office of the DPP, the Police Legal Advisor, and the Bar Association of Guyana were invited to make written submissions on the suitable amendment to be made to section 72.

“We believe that this amendment to section 72 adequately meets the Orders of the CCJ in the Marcus Bisram decision and is the most suitable reflection of the several stakeholder views, which we commend to this Parliament as the law-making body on behalf of the people of Guyana,” Nandlall said.

And now with the amendment:

(i) the DPP can no longer direct a Magistrate. The power of the DPP to direct a magistrate is removed and the DPP must now make an application to a Judge of the High Court for a warrant for the arrest and committal for trial of a discharged person.

(ii) The judge will grant the application only if the evidence is sufficient to commit the accused to trial.

(iv) Finally, where either the DPP or the discharged person is aggrieved by a decision of the Judge, either party may appeal to the Court of Appeal.

Former Minister of Public Security Khemraj Ramjattan made contributions from the opposition benches and said he fully concurs with the sentiments expressed by the AG.

He told the House that the section of the Act had remained law in Guyana for longer than it was relevant and as a former prosecutor and practicing lawyer, he was happy with the amendment.

Government MP Sanjeev Datadin who represented Marcus Bisram as his attorney contributed to the debate on Monday and stood in full support of the amendments.

Following the debate, the Amendment Bill was passed with bipartisan support from the government and opposition sides of the National Assembly and in effect strip the DPP of the powers once bestowed on the office to instruct Magistrates.

_____