Magistrates can continue to preside over extradition proceedings despite no longer being required to adjudicate over preliminary enquiries for serious criminal offences.
High Court Judge Ricky Rahim issued the declaration yesterday as he determined an interpretation lawsuit brought by the Office of the Attorney General.
In the lawsuit, Justice Rahim was asked to consider the effect of the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Amendment Act (AJIPAA) on the role of a magistrate under the Extradition (Commonwealth and Foreign Territories) Act.
The AJIPAA, which was proclaimed in December, last year, sought to reduce delays in the criminal justice system by replacing preliminary enquiries before magistrates with sufficiency hearings before High Court Masters.
Both legal processes require judicial officers to determine whether there is sufficient evidence or legal basis for cases to go to trial before a judge and jury or before a judge alone if an accused person so elects.
The case was filed after acting Chief Magistrate Christine Charles stopped extradition proceedings brought earlier this year against Vincent Roberts, who is wanted in the United States for the attempted murder of his ex-girlfriend.
The outcome of the case means that the proceedings against Roberts can now resume before Magistrate Charles.
In determining the case, Justice Rahim noted that while a magistrate’s powers in preliminary enquiries and extradition proceedings are similar, the latter is covered under the extradition legislation.
Justice Rahim said, “To put it another way, the jurisdiction and powers of the magistrate to hold extradition hearings remain the very jurisdiction and powers vested in the magistrate under the PE Acts prior to the abolition of preliminary enquiries and which were conferred by the Extradition Act that remains in force.”
“The nature, scope and ambit of the jurisdiction and powers remain in place,” he added.
He noted that Magistrate Charles’ concerns over the effect of the AJIPAA were unfounded.
Justice Rahim also stated that even if the AJIPAA applied, Roberts’ extradition proceedings could have still continued before Magistrate Charles as proceedings filed before its proclamation were unaffected.
Roberts was arrested on February 28, 2021, and arraigned days later after he allegedly attacked his ex-girlfriend for refusing to rekindle their relationship.
He was released after posting bail.
Several weeks later, Roberts was indicted by a grand jury in Brooklyn, New York, and was ordered to reappear in court in January, last year, to answer three charges including attempted murder.
A warrant was issued by a US judge after Roberts reportedly fled the country on a flight to Trinidad on December 11, 2022.
Roberts was eventually arrested at Desperlie Crescent in Laventille by Sgt Carlos Norton.
On January 15, Attorney General Reginald Armour, SC, issued the authority to proceed (ATP) with extradition proceedings before Magistrate Charles.
The AG’s Office was represented by Ravi Rajcoomar, SC, Raphael Ajodhia, Netram Kowlessar, and Raydon Dalrymple-Watts. Roberts was represented by Kiev Chesney, while Christophe Rodriguez represented Magistrate Charles.
