Thursday, September 13, 2012

PNM supported controversial legal bill, Hansard shows

HANSARD: Friday, November 18, 2011

Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Bill, 2011.

Clause 34.

Question proposed: That clause 34 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Mrs. Persad-Bissessar: Mr. Chairman, we propose an amendment to clause 34(2) as circulated:
“Delete the word „seven‟ and substitute the word „ten”‟.

Mr. Chairman: Thank you. I think the hon. Member—

Mr. Imbert: Yes, what is the policy behind going from seven to ten? Because this is a situation where there is a delay and you are allowing the judicial officer to discharge the accused. In your original Bill it was seven years, after a delay of seven years, now ten. Why ten? Are you picking this from some Commonwealth standard? Why ten?

Mr. Volney: No, you see, it is a paradigm shift and what we would like to do is to start with ten, to be conservative with ten, and at the appropriate time we could always lessen it. That is how we look at it at this time.

Mrs. Persad-Bissessar: Are you proposing that we keep seven?

Mr. Imbert: Yes, I do not know why you want to amend it. Ten years is a long time between charge and trial, you know—somebody waiting for ten years.

Mrs. Persad-Bissessar: Should we keep it at the seven, are you prepared to vote for the Bill? Would you vote for it?

Mr. Imbert: Yes.
Mrs. Persad-Bissessar: For the entire Bill?
Mr. Imbert: You hear us say we opposing the Bill?

Mrs. Persad-Bissessar: No, I do not know, I am asking?
Mr. Imbert: Did you hear us say we are opposing the Bill?
Mrs. Persad-Bissessar: Well, we will keep it as seven. I withdraw the proposed amendment.

Mr. Chairman: All right, so could I put the question, hon. Members?
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 34, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

No comments:

Jai & Sero

Jai & Sero

Our family at home in Toronto 2008

Our family at home in Toronto 2008
Amit, Heather, Fuzz, Aj, Jiv, Shiva, Rampa, Sero, Jai