JLSC asks for interpretation summons to be struck

Former chief magistrate Marcia Ayers-Caesar is not the only one seeking to have the interpretation summons filed by the Attorney General struck out.

The Judicial and Legal Services Commission (JLSC) – which recommended her appointment as a judge – has also asked for the summons to be removed from the court, on the basis that it was an abuse, since the commission and Ayers-Caesar are against each other in a judicial-review application she filed. The judicial review application challenges her removal as a judge of the High Court.

In submissions filed on Friday, the JLSC’s lawyer Deborah Peake,SC, argues that there were no statutory provisions or Rule of Court cited by the AG authorising the high court to determine the summons.

She also said the JLSC had no jurisdiction or role to perform regarding the unfinished magisterial cases.

In her submissions on behalf of the JLSC, Peake also said her client was given no notice by the AG, as was required for fixed-date claims, and has had to incur legal costs by hiring lawyers.

Peake said the JLSC’s presence in the AG’s action was simply “not necessary.”

Justice Carol Gobin is presiding over the matter and parties will return to court on April 10.

The claim filed by Attorney General Faris Al-Rawi asks the court to determine how to conclude the unfinished cases, pronounce on whether Ayers-Caesar is still a magistrate and if any of the cases can be continued by her or whether they can be restarted afresh before acting Chief Magistrate Maria Busby Earle-Caddle. Ayers-Caesar is named as the fourth defendant in the legal proceedings filed by Al-Rawi on September 1, last year, which seek to have the court pronounce on what should be done with the cases left in abeyance when she was elevated to the High Court as a judge on April 12, 2017. She resigned two weeks later. However, she claimed she was forced to do so, and has since filed separate proceedings against the JLSC challenging this.

Ayers-Caesar has been granted leave by Justice David Harris and, according to her attorneys, led by Senior Counsel Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, the interpretation summons will be an abuse of process against her, as it raised certain issues also noted by Ayers-Caesar in her case against the JLSC. He also said it was an abuse of process and oppressive to her since it created a multiplicity of proceedings.

In his interpretation summons, Al-Rawi said it was filed in the public’s interest, as the issue of the unfinished cases had an impact on the rights of the accused and the wider public interest. The claim also notes the resolution will clarify the progress of pending cases.

Several of the 53 cases which were left in abeyance have since been restarted. There has been no indication of the number that are still part-heard.