KINGSTON, Jamaica — The five detainees under the ongoing states of emergency (SOE), who are challenging the legality of their detention before the Supreme Court, yesterday lost a bid to be allowed to clear their names over allegations they say have been made by the lawmen against them.

Last Wednesday, Supreme Court judge Justice Bertram Morrison granted a writ of habeas corpus, which was brought by the lawyers, and ordered that the men — Nicholas Heat, Courtney Hall, Gavin Nobel, Courtney Thompson and Everton Douglas — be brought before the court on Monday. That writ essentially allowed for the men to be brought before the court so it could enquire as to the reasons for them being in custody, whether or not they are charged or are being properly held under law.

The government, however, on Friday filed an affidavit outlining several allegations against each of the men.

On Monday morning, two police officers told the court that the detention of the men was essential. It was pointed out that Hall was a high ranking Westmoreland gang member for whom the police were assembling evidence to lay charges. Douglas, the court was told, is the head of a Corporate Area gang.

Yesterday, however, the lawyers representing the men, John Clarke and Issat Buchanan, lost their bid to have the men respond to those allegations after their request was struck down on the basis that the affidavits that were to be served on the office of the Attorney General (AG) to secure this were improperly served and without the court’s permission.

Supreme Court judge Justice Bertram Morrison, after hearing a submission from Louis Hacker, the lawyer representing the Attorney General’s office, on what transpired in respect of the affidavits, said curtly, “disregard it”.

Clarke argued in vain that the AG’s office filed the affidavits on Friday, three minutes before the court offices closed, leaving his team no option but to file their response on Monday. He said when his team handed the response to the states’ legal team, “they said they couldn’t accept it, we would have to take it to their office”.

“When we filed it at the office they are saying they didn’t see it until they went back to the office in the evening,” Clarke explained.

But in acceding to the judge’s ruling on the matter yesterday, Clarke said the decision not to allow the men to defend their names was “not fatal” to the case before the court as the issue the judge is expected to decide on is whether the men are being held legally or not.

In the meantime, Deputy Superintendent of Police Jervis Williams, who was called to give evidence in relation to Heat, told the court that Heat was detained under the SOE and that subsequently an order of detention was issued by the national security minister.

Under questioning from Clarke, Williams, who is a custody officer, said there are currently 19 people detained at the Tamarind Farm Correctional facility, 19 at the Duhaney Park lock up, and 15 at the Hunts Bay lock up.

He told the court that the individuals at Hunts Bay have all been charged.

Asked when the detention order for Heat ends, Williams said, “a detention order can last for the duration of the SOE for the period of time that the Parliament determines that the SOE remains in force. He can be held for that duration.

“So if Parliament says the SOE can continue for a period of five years he can be held for that period of time?” Clarke wanted to know.

“He can be,” Williams replied.

“If I substituted five years for 20 he can be held for that duration as well?” Clarke pressed further.

“As I understand it, yes,” Williams said.

In the meantime, Detective Constable David Binns yesterday admitted to the court under questioning from Clarke that a statement he had given in 2019 was in relation to a 2017 incident involving Heat. According to Binns, that statement was a “further statement” regarding the matter that Heat was charged for in 2017, but was freed because the complainant refused to come to court. He said he was asked by the prosecutor then to write the further statement after the matter was disposed of by the court. According to Binns, that statement was to record additional details about his investigations.

Asked whether he recalled that the further statement he wrote was in response to Heat’s notice of objection to the tribunal as to why he should not be released, Binns said “yes”.

Asked, “would you agree that the only thing you could draw for (in respect of Heat) was an incident dismissed by the court two years ago, Binns said “no”. He further denied playing a role in the detention of Heat under the SOE.

And the submissions which should have been made by lawyers on both sides were yesterday not heard after Hacker indicated that he had been prepared to make an oral and not a written submission.

Justice Morrison however indicated that he had expected the submissions to be made in writing instead.

“I don’t intend to sit here and write all day. Fifteen minutes each, you will not have all day,” Justice Morrison directed.

Hacker, in bargaining for more time, pleaded, “45 minutes milord”, only to be told by the judge, “if it will be reduced in writing you don’t need more than 15 minutes” . Pointing out that he had other matters to attend to before the court term ends on Friday, Justice Morrison said the attorneys would need to complete their submissions in good time today as he would need to give the verdict by afternoon and would also need time to consider the details in the case.

“Don’t expect me to give you an off the cuff judgement,” Justice Morrison told the attorneys.

The sitting was then adjourned to 10:00 am today.

Alicia Dunkley Willis