Court hands down ruling on admissibility of statements

But the CCJ said that the statements could be used for identification purposes and for cross examination as it continued hearing evidence in the case in which 25-year-old Shanique Myrie, 25, alleged that when she travelled to Barbados on March 14, 2011 she was discriminated against because of her nationality, subjected to a body cavity search, detained overnight in a cell and deported to Jamaica the following day.

Myrie also claimed that she was subjected to derogatory remarks by a Barbadian Immigration officer at the Grantley Adams International Airport and is asking the CCJ to determine the minimum standard of treatment applicable to Caribbean Community (CARICOM) citizens moving around the region.

On September 27 last year, Jamaica was granted leave to intervene in the matter.

Last week, the CCJ held its first ever sitting in Jamaica to hear testimonies from several witnesses and is now holding a similar hearing in Barbados.

On Monday, lawyers representing the Barbados government had objected to efforts by Myrie’s legal team that the statements by the two people be admitted as evidence.

Queen’s Counsel Roger Forde had objected, saying to admit the statements without examining their veracity would be highly improper. He argued that Myrie’s lawyer should have done it during the pre-trial disclosure.

Attorney Kathy Brown, who is representing the Jamaica government argued, that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) accepts all documentation submitted by any party.

But the CCJ panel of judges, headed by President Sir Dennis Byron, ruled that the “statements taken from Daniel Forde and Shakira Rowe be admitted for identification purposes and that the claimant, and by necessary extension, the Intevener is permitted to use statement contained therein for the purposes of the cross examination of witnesses”.

Reprinted from CanaNews

Leave a Reply

error: Content is protected !!