Police versus Judge Fiona Robinson, verdict in two weeks |10 July 2020

Lawyer Chetty has two weeks to file a written submission on the interpretation of the three laws he raised in yesterday’s hearing (Photo: Patrick Joubert)

It will be in two weeks’ time that the Supreme Court will give its verdict as to whether it was accurate for Judge Fiona Robinson to rule that it is unlawful for the police to search a person even though he or she gives his or her consent for the search to be carried out.

The ruling to be given by his Lordship Ronny Govinden is in relation to a case, involving the leader of the opposition Wavel Ramkalawan who had his luggage searched at the Seychelles International Airport by Anti-Narcotics Bureau (ANB) officers on February 8, 2020 upon his return from South Africa.

Following an inquiry, Judge Robinson said the search was unlawful as per S25 (1) (a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 2016 and the police, represented by lawyer Frank Elizabeth, are seeking a judicial review from the Supreme Court on the matter.

In the hearing before Judge Govinden yesterday morning, lawyer Elvis Chetty representing the defendant, Judge Robinson, had brought in three law interpretations for the defence which stated that (1), the petition brought forward by the police has been instituted against the wrong party, (2) the petition has failed to plead material facts and (3) the affidavit in support of the petition is defective.

Lawyer Elizabeth had requested to Judge Govinden for lawyer Chetty, representing the defence, to firstly file a written submission on the interpretation of the three laws raised in the hearing before he could be able to respond to them. He claimed that the interpretation of the three laws were not clear enough. Judge Govinden awarded Mr Chetty two weeks to file the written submission upon which Mr Elizabeth will be able to respond to the written arguments.

Yesterday, was supposed to be the last day for lawyer Chetty to submit his defence following a one-week grace period.

Patrick Joubert