Attorney General Reginald Armour said yesterday that he agrees, in principle, that the Electronic Transactions Act pertains to legal documents to and from the Judiciary and other state entities.
Armour responded to a question on the issue of the Electronic Transactions Act and the Judiciary at a post-Cabinet media conference at Whitehall, Port-of-Spain.
Asked whether the act pertains to legal documents to and from the judiciary, Armour said, “In principle, yes.”
His comment came in the context of a dispute between Director of Public Prosecutions Roger Gaspard and the Judiciary over the electronic submission by the latter of the committal bundle for the Dana Seetahal SC murder trial in the High Court.
However, he declined comment on what is taking place in the Judiciary on the Seetahal case or on conversations between the Chief Justice and Director of Public Prosecutions on the matter.
In a news release on Tuesday, Gaspard said he is unable to file an indictment until the committal bundle is sent to him by the Magistrates’ Court.
He said sections 25 to 27 of the Indictable Offences (Preliminary Enquiry) Act “do not contemplate the Director of Public Prosecutions filing a valid indictment on the basis of copies, whether electronic or otherwise.
“The consequence of not filing a valid indictment is that it would become liable to be quashed and no trial could occur.”
But a T&T Guardian editorial yesterday pointed out that the Electronic Transactions Act is meant to give legal effect to electronic documents, records, signatures and transactions. The act was assented to on April 28, 2011, and parts I, II, III and IV came into operation on January 6, 2012.
Section 8 of the act, which is in part II of the legislation, states, “Information or a record in electronic form or a data message shall not be denied legal effect, admissibility or enforceability solely on the grounds that it is—(a) rendered or made available in electronic form; or (b) not contained in the information, data message, or record in electronic form purporting to give rise to such legal effect but is referred to in that information, data message or record.”
Further, section 9 states, “The legal requirement that information, a record or a data message be in writing is satisfied where that information, record or data message is presented in electronic form, if the information, record or data message is accessible and capable of retention for subsequent reference.”
Section 6 of the Act states that part II, III and IV of this Act shall not apply to any written law requiring writing, signatures or original documents for:
• The making, execution or revocation of a will or testamentary instrument;
• The conveyance of real or personal property or the transfer of any interest in real or personal property;
• The creation, performance or enforcement of an indenture, declaration of trust or power of attorney;
• The production of documents relating to immigration, citizenship or passport matters; or
• The recognition or endorsement of negotiable instruments.