0

Supreme Court Hears Legal Arguments In Habeas Corpus Applications

By AVA TURNQUEST

Tribune Chief Reporter

aturnquest@tribunemedia.net

LEGAL arguments in six habeas corpus applications yesterday centred around differing interpretations of the powers extended to immigration officers as prescribed in the Immigration Act.

Supreme Court Justice Gregory Hilton adjourned all matters to February 8, when he is expected to deliver a ruling on the lawfulness of the arrest and detention of Kediesha Bent-John and her daughter; Earl Burton; Gerna Tinord; Verante Mocombe and Franck Pierre.

Those applications are among some 15 separate cases in which the government has been asked to prove the lawfulness of the applicants' arrest and further detention at the Carmichael Road Detention Centre.

Of those cases, several applicants have been unconditionally released; however, the Crown has objected to costs being awarded due to its position that all the arrests and subsequent detention were lawful.

Writs

The applications for habeas corpus writs were filed in the Supreme Court against the attorney general, minister of immigration, director of immigration and superintendent of the Carmichael Road Detention Centre.

For the crown, Kirkland Mackey appeared with Kenny Thompson in the separate cases of William Oneil and Mr Pierre.

Sophia Thompson-Williams appeared with David Whyms in the matters for Mrs Bent-John, Mr Burton, Ms Mocombe, and Ms Tinord.

In all matters, defendants were represented by Fred Smith and his junior Crispin Hall.

Comments

Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.

Sign in to comment