By Clint Chan Tack Wednesday, October 28 2009

click on pic to zoom in

YOU'RE NOT LISTENING: Attorney General John Jeremie points towards the Opposition benches in the Senate yesterday as he complained that members on tha...

ATTORNEY GENERAL John Jeremie yesterday assured that the Evidence Amendment Bill 2009 will strengthen the country’s criminal justice system without undermining fundamental rights of citizens as enshrined in the Constitution.

In opening debate on the bill in the Senate, Jeremie raised the eyebrows of Opposition senators when he said it could be passed by simple majority and not the three-fifth’s majority as stated in the legislation.

“There has been a marked increase in the number of criminal trials which have been aborted or discontinued where witnesses have refused to give evidence or have recanted on previously given evidence or statements.

Often witnesses who have previously given statements to the police and given evidence at the preliminary inquiry, absent themselves at the trial or having appeared, recant their original version of the events or face significant lapse of memory surrounding these events,” he said.

Explaining that these actions bring the veracity of the witness and reliability of the evidence into question, Jeremie declared: “This frustrates the administration of criminal justice and the Government is of the view that it cannot be allowed to continue.”

Noting the bill’s preamble indicates it requires a three-fifths majority vote to pass in the Senate and the House of Representatives, Jeremie said: “After consideration, I have advised Government and Government is of the view that this bill can be constitutionally enacted by a simple majority vote.”

While UNC senators murmured among themselves, the AG continued: “At the appropriate stage I intend to move an amendment to the bill to delete the preamble, the constitutional clause and the special parliamentary certificate at the end of the bill. The special parliamentary certificate will be replaced by a simple majority parliamentary certificate.”

He explained that the question about whether or not a bill requires a three-fifths majority for passage lies in Section 13 of the Constitution. “Only when a bill seeks to infringe Sections Four or Five will it require to be enacted by Section 13 of the Constitution,” Jeremie said. The AG added that the bill does not infringe the rights listed in those sections.

The bill provides for the admissibility in criminal proceedings of the contents of a previous inconsistent statement made by a person; video or audio recordings of the voluntary statements of prosecution, defence witnesses and the accused and abolition of the common law rule governing the admissibility of bad character evidence. As UNC senators either ignored him or chatted amongst themselves, Jeremie complained to Senate President Danny Montano: “My friends are not listening to me. They are laughing. They are joking. Their minds are bent in opposing the bill.”

Stating that the bill was vital to support the efforts of the National Security Ministry and law enforcement agencies in the war against crime, Jeremie declared: “I call on all patriots including Senator Wade Mark to support the bill this afternoon.” Before Mark began his reply, Montano warned all senators about reading statements when they spoke during the debate.

He said only the mover of a motion had any leeway when it came to quoting from written statements in a debate.