David Patterson sues State months after blocked from leaving country

Opposition Parliamentarian David Patterson has filed a lawsuit against the State claiming damages in excess of $100, 000, months after he was blocked from leaving Guyana through the Cheddi Jagan International Airport (CJIA).

Patterson is claiming damages for breach of his fundamental right to freedom of movement and unspecified sums for exemplary damages, costs and other orders the Court may see fit. Patterson said that he experienced loss, shame, and embarrassment as a result of the occurrence.

The Fixed Date Application, filed on Tuesday last, will come up for hearing before Chief Justice (ag) Roxane George on February 01, 2024 at 10:00 hrs.

Patterson is represented by Attorney Nigel Hughes and Attorney General Anil Nandlall has been named as the sole respondent on behalf of the State.

In October, Hughes sent a letter to Nandlall seeking $25 million as compensation for his client. In that letter, Hughes had told Nandlall that failure to respond within five days of receipt would lead to the filing of constitutional proceedings.

Back in April, the Guyana Police Force issued an apology to Patterson after he was prevented from leaving the country in violation of a judgement already handed down in a similar matter by the a High Court Judge.

The Force, in its statement, said Patterson was mistakenly left on an Immigration Department watch list that barred him from flying. He was initially placed on that watch list following allegations that he indecently exposed himself in July 2023.

In January 2023, Justice Navindra Singh ruled that the Guyana Police Force does not have the authority to blacklist persons from leaving the jurisdiction.

This landmark ruling stemmed from the constitutional challenge filed at the High Court by Police Finance Officer, Woman Senior Superintendent (ag) Marcelene Washington, who was before the court on conspiracy charges for allegedly defrauding the State.

Patterson was similarly facing charges in the Court at the time.

In his Application, the former Public Infrastructure Minister argued during his arraignment on the charges, the Magistrate gave him permission to enter and exit Guyana while the charges are pending.

He claimed that even after his attorney had warned the immigration officer that denying him permission to leave the country would violate his fundamental rights as stated in Article 148 of the Constitution, he had still been barred from boarding the aircraft.

“The applicant was unable to attend and deliver the presentation to the Congressional Caucus at Capitol Hill in his capacity as a member of the National Assembly on matters of concern to the citizens of Guyana. The applicant was forced to incur the expense of returning to Georgetown, paying a penalty for lost travel and accommodation expenses,” the lawsuit stated.

As per the Statement of Claim, the Chief Immigration Officer has acknowledged that there was no legitimate reason to stop the applicant from leaving Guyana.

In addition to damages, he is asking the High Court to award him costs and any other orders the court deems just.

Advertisement

_____