Walter et Al v Goodwin (No. 1)

• Jurisdiction: Antigua and Barbuda
• Court: High Court (Antigua)
• Judge: Benjamin, J.
• Judgment Date: 27 September 1996
• Neutral Citation: AG 1996 HC 10
• Docket Number: No. 145 of 1996
• Date: 27 September 1996

Walter et al

and

Goodwin (No. 1)

Benjamin, J.

No. 145 of 1996

High Court

Practice and procedure - Contempt of Court — The first — named respondent in his capacity as Commissioner of the Royal Police Force of Antigua and Barbuda published a Press Release while criminal proceedings were pending and undetermined in respect of certain charges of certain summary offences — Respondents raised certain objections in limine to the jurisdiction of the court — Contempt of Court Act, 1988 — It is not accepted that the purport of the Contempt of Court Act is to oust the power of the High Court to punish those who commit an act which tends to interfere with the administration of justice in the Magistrates' Court — The second limb of the preliminary objection contends that the grounds disclose no publication by the Commissioner — The Commissioner of Police being the complainant in the cases against the applicants is not a mere reporter but a party to the proceedings — The second limb of objection is accordingly rejected — Preliminary objections are overruled with costs to the applicants to be taxed.

Appearances:

Mr. S. Christian, Q.C., Mr. J. Simon with him, for the applicants.

Mr. A. Astaphan and Miss J. Laurent for the respondents.

RULING:

1 The applicants to this motion are charged along with others with certain summary offences arising from an incident which allegedly occurred on 10th September, 1996 at High Street in the Parish of St. John's in Magisterial District “A.” The said charges are triable before a Magistrate and are still pending.

2 On 16th September, 1996, the Applicants applied to the High Court by way of motion for an Order that the first-named Respondent Alvin Goodwin in his capacity as Commissioner of the Royal Police Force of Antigua and Barbuda “do stand in contempt of Court in publishing a Press Release dated 10 ^th September, 1996 while criminal proceedings are pending and undetermined” in respect of the aforementioned charges.

3 The applicants further sought an order that the said Press Release, which is mutually accepted to have been issued by the Royal Police Force of Antigua and Barbuda and signed by the first named respondent in his capacity as Commissioner of Police “was calculated to prejudice the fair trial of the applicants and undermine the administration of justice by attempting to influence the magistrate and members of the public with facts which may or may not be proved at the trial.”

4 The text of the said Press Release is not now pertinent as the respondents have raised certain objections in limine to the jurisdiction of the court. It is to these preliminary objections that this ruling is directed.

5 By ‘jurisdiction’ the respondents brought into focus the meaning of that term attributed by Halbury's Laws Of England (4 ^th Edition) Volume 10 at paragraph 715 on the subject of “Courts”. The learned authors wrote:

“By ‘jurisdiction’ is meant the authority which a court has to decide matter that are litigated before it or to take cognisance of matters presented in a formal way for its decision.”

6 It is within the purview of parliament to restrict, limit or modify such authority by statute.

7 Counsel for the respondents submitted that the jurisdiction of the High Court of the Supreme Court in Antigua and Barbuda has been limited by statute to exclude the previous inherent power to punish any contempts committed in relation to inferior courts such as the Magistrate's court. It was argued that the compendious effect of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court Act, Cap. 143, the contempt of Court Act, Cap. 99, Order 73, Rule 1 of the Rules of the Supreme Court, 1970 and sections 242 and 243 of the Magistrates' Code of Procedure Act, Cap. 255 is that the Supreme Court no longer enjoys the superintendent power to watch over proceedings of inferior courts which superintendence would contemplate the authority to prevent any interference with the course of justice in such courts. The argument concluded that the only contempts punishable in relation to the magistrates court are those committed in the face of the court, and then, such contempts are punishable by the magistrates' court itself.

8 Counsel further submitted that the rationale for Parliament's restriction of the High Court's prerogative to punish for contempts committed in the Magistrates' Court is the notorious fact that trials in the Magistrates' Court are conducted without juries by legally trained Attorneys-at-Law in respect of whom there is no prospect of prejudice from the external influence of the media or other sources. The magistrates were to be treated as immune to prejudice and are presumed to apply the law and the rules of evidence to the evidence as led before the Court. In England, the Queen's Bench Division enjoys general superintendence over the proceedings of inferior courts. The jurisdiction is not only concerned with the prevention of the exceeding of their jurisdiction or acting in breach of the law, but extends to the prevention of interference with the course of justice in such inferior courts.

9 Prior to the passing of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court Act, Cap. 143 (previously styled the West Indies Associated States Supreme Court Ordinance) which took effect on 1st January,...