Man on terrorism charges back in court on March 1

A ST AUGUSTINE man accused of inciting acts of terrorism by way of posts on his Facebook page in 2018 will return to court in March.

On January 22, acting Chief Magistrate Adrian Darmanie adjourned the matter to March 1 for an update on how the case will proceed.

Jonathan Mohammed, 27, appeared before Darmanie on the 2018 charge of sedition and inciting terrorism activities.

Those charges arose out of an investigation launched after Mohammed posted certain messages on his profile on October 28, 2018. The charges are: That on October 28, on the island of Trinidad and Tobago, (he) knowingly and without lawful excuse incited the commission of a terrorist act likely to cause the loss of life or severe bodily harm and or the endangerment of persons lives to wit suggesting that the African population be reduced by violent means with the intention of intimidating a section of the public to wit persons of the African race for the purpose of advancing an ideological or religious cause.

The second charge read that he used his Facebook page which was viewed by persons on his friends list (and) communicated seditious statements the purpose of which was to endanger or promote feelings of ill-will or hostility or contempt between persons of East Indian descent on the one hand and persons of African descent on the other hand.

The charges were laid indictably.

Mohammed first appeared on the charges in November 2018, before then-chief magistrate Maria Busby Earle-Caddle.

Since she has now been appointed an acting judge, Darmanie heard the case on Monday and was told the matter had been held up because of a ruling on the constitutionality of the Sedition Act.

That ruling was the challenge brought by the late Maha Sabha secretary general Satnarayan Maharaj. In October 2023, the Privy Council upheld the sedition law, dismissing the Maha Sabha’s appeal.

Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Giselle Ferguson-Heller, who was only recently reassigned to the matter, said on perusing the file, she had seen some statements which were yet to be sworn to and filed.

She also said some witnesses did not want to swear, so the State would possibly be minded to ask for the matter to stay under the Preliminary Inquiries Act and not have it sent to a High Court master under the new Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act (AJIPAA), which removes preliminary inquiries from the district courts. Indictable cases now go straight to the High Court.

However, Mohammed’s attorney Ravi Rajcoomar, SC, said he had no objection to the case's being transferred to the master, since “under AJIPPA, a master had one thing a magistrate did not – a guillotine,” in reference to the rules for the progress of cases under the new law.

Darmanie adjourned the matter to March 1 for a status update.