Man challenges camouflage laws

A Carenage man charged in 2018 with being in possession of two pairs of camouflage pants is challenging a legal notice which criminalises the importation of “camouflage pattern materials.”

In his lawsuit, Isaiah Prince says Legal Notice 33 of 1984 contravenes his rights and offends the separation of powers.

His lawsuit was filed at the High Court in Port of Spain and will come up for hearing on April 6 before Justice Kevin Ramcharan.

Prince is represented by attorneys Jagdeo Singh, Kiel Taklalsingh, Karina Singh and Chelsea John.

In his claim, the site supervisor said criminal offences can only be created by Parliament and the President and Executive cannot use broad statutory provisions to criminalise conduct with general and ambiguous words while contravening the rights of citizens.

According to the claim, the use of the words “camouflage pattern material” to describe an offence is vague, uncertain and offends the rule of law and should be declared unlawful. He also intends to argue that the notice, created by presidential decree, was “over broad” and constituted an overreach of criminal law.

Prince is seeking several declarations that his rights are being infringed.

The lawsuit also says a notice posted by the Comptroller of Customs on the Customs and Excise Division’s website lists a variety of clothing deemed to be illegal.

It includes: high-heeled boots, pink flip flops, pink patterned female trousers, bags, caps, purses and three-quarter length pants.

The notice also says it includes all items of camouflage and all colours.

Prince was arrested and charged in March 2018, after police found two pairs of camouflage pants in his brother’s bedroom, despite him telling them the pants did not belong to him.

Prince’s lawsuit also says that the Customs Act, in particular section 213(c), under which he was charged, does not define or specify the types of camouflage pattern materials that are illegal and makes no reference to camouflage at all.

In February, the police reminded people that wearing camouflage patterns of any colour was against the law.

Mention was made of the Summary Offences Act, the Defence Force Act, and the Customs Act which prohibit people, not serving in the TT Defence, from wearing, without the minister’s permission, clothing closely resembling the uniform of a member of the Defence Force.