High Court reopens with in-person hearings, jury trials

AT least two judges have resumed in-person hearings at the Hall of Justice in Port of Spain, and the first jury trial is likely to be held in May.

On Wednesday, Justice Frank Seepersad, sitting in the civil jurisdiction, held a trial for a land claim in which the property was subjected to two agreements for sale.

There were four witnesses to give trial in person but the matter was eventually settled by consent without anyone having to give evidence.

Justice Eleanor Donaldson-Honeywell, also in the civil division, presided over her court on Wednesday at the court building.

All public health protocols were followed, with lawyers all wearing their masks in the courtroom fitted with 75 seats, which held 15 people for the trial.

Seepersad had to change courtrooms because half the lights in the one he was in were not working. After the switch, he “welcomed back” the attorneys to the physical courtroom.

“This has been long overdue,” he said while apologising for the non-working lights in the previous courtroom.

He also said thankfully it was not a hybrid trial, since none of the civil courts are outfitted with monitors to accommodate virtual testimony by witnesses, nor were dividers set up.

He commented, “It is difficult to comprehend why, over this two-year period, our courtroom spaces were not properly outfitted to facilitate in-person and hybrid hearings.

“Although this is the sad reality, one cannot be deterred, and the right to unimpeded access to justice must prevail.”

The matter was stood down so the parties could discuss the case, and when it resumed so that they could inform the judge of the consensual position, Seepersad said the in-person hearing facilitated those discussions and demonstrated there was a human aspect to justice that required interaction and engagement.

Attorney Kiel Taklalsingh, who appeared with attorneys Dinesh Rambally and Stefan Ramkissoon for the claimant in the land case, commended the judge for his “initiative and enterprise” in having the trial heard in person.

He said the case involved factual conflicts and the justice of the case warranted a trial in court, in person. He said it facilitated interpersonal interactions, which were more conducive to settlement talks.

Two weekends ago, the court’s covid19 pandemic rules were lifted to allow jury trials and in-person access to courts where matters cannot be held virtually. Prisoners are still not allowed to enter court buildings and for anyone to access the courts, there are forms to be filled out 48 hours in advance to indicate to the court authorities who will be attending the matter scheduled for the in-person hearing.

Over the last two years, since March 2020, judges have worked virtually, with some going to the Hall of Justice or the Supreme Court in San Fernando to hold virtual trials.

At a virtual court hearing in the criminal division, what is likely to be the first jury trial has been set to start on May 23. On May 2, a judge-only trial will also be held in person, both at the Hall of Justice.

Justice Hayden St Clair-Douglas set May 23 for the start of a jury trial in a murder case, but made it clear to attorneys the court will not allow them to drag it on.

While he said an accused had a right to have witnesses present for cross-examination, he urged attorneys to remember the criminal justice system was over-burdened, there having been no jury trials for two years.

“The system is overburdened. We have more cases to try than we have time to try them.”

He said it would be unreasonable to have witnesses whose evidence were not being challenged brought to the court, “having regard to circumstances that now obtain.”

He said the court will not exercise its discretion in an unreasonable matter to force anyone who agreed to certain formal admissions to be bound by that agreement, but it was not for attorneys to waste the court’s time by having a trial go on for a month when it could be completed in two weeks if not for unreasonable requests.

In that murder trial, the prosecution has 14 witnesses and it is expected the trial will take two weeks once it begins on May 23. The accused in that matter is represented by attorney Mario Merritt.

At another virtual hearing, May 2 was set for the start of a drug-possession trial involving two accused. This too will take place in person at the Hall of Justice, although it is a judge-only trial and the two accused are on bail. The reason for the in-person hearing is because one of the prosecution’s witnesses is undergoing medical treatment and has expressed concern over the potential risk to his immune system by giving evidence from a “high-traffic” location such as the Judiciary’s virtual-access customer centres.

Justice Lisa Ramsumair-Hinds, who also spoke of her own health issues, said she will try to arrange a courtroom at the Hall of Justice for May 2, when the two accused are expected to be arraigned and evidence taken.

The judge admitted being nervous about the first week of May, but, at the same time, was excited about the physical return to thecourt.