Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall has declared that the Acting Chief Magistrate, Faith McGusty had no authority to grant Adonika Aulder – the wife of embattled Assistant Commissioner of Police Calvin Brutus, permission to leave the country as she remains before the Court as a defendant.

But the Magistrate simply released the passport of the accused from the Court’s custody, thereby allowing her to leave the country.

Aulder and her husband are both facing multiple fraud and money laundering charges, along with several other persons. However, last week, she got the Magistrates’ Court’s permission to leave the country for medical attention. 

Attorney General Nandlall has criticized the decision of the Acting Chief Magistrate. On his “Issues in the News” programme last evening, he said the Magistrates’ Court has no authority to grant permission to an accused to leave the jurisdiction. 

“Now it is my respectful contention that a Magistrate has no jurisdiction or power to grant permission for a defendant to leave the jurisdiction, where that defendant is charged with a criminal offence and has been granted bail,” the Attorney General said.

He explained that once a person pleads not guilty, the Court has three options once it decides not to conduct a trial immediately. Those options would be to remand the defendant to prison, to grant bail or to release the defendant on his or her own recognizance.  

 “It is only in that third instance when you are free to go, that you may be permitted to leave the country if you wish. But where you are remanded, obviously you can’t leave the country and when you are remanded and in the custody of your bailor, you cannot leave the country either. You cannot leave the jurisdiction of the Court, and the Magistrates’ Court, being a Court of the creature of statute, has no power in the statute, in the legislation to grant you power to leave the jurisdiction. No Magistrate has that power,” the Attorney General said. 

He said persons granted bail at the level of the Magistrates’ Court, and are desirous of leaving the country must get permission from the High Court to leave the jurisdiction. 

According to him, the High Court is vested with the power under the Constitution of Guyana, to grant such relief. 

However, the Attorney General said in this particular case, the High Court had denied an earlier request, and the Magistrates’ Court should have been guided by the ruling of the High Court. 

“In this very case, the High Court had adjudicated on the question already in relation to this same defendant, and the High Court refused permission to travel. A Magistrate ought to have considered him or her self-bound by that determination. First of all, the Magistrate should not have entertained the application because they had no power to do anything with it other than to reject it,” the Attorney General said. 

The request referenced by the Attorney General was before charges were laid against Brutus and his wife and was in relation to Brutus seeking relief from the Police Force’s decision not to grant him permission to leave the country.

The Attorney General has not indicated any plan to challenge the decision of the Acting Chief Magistrate, although he has described it as a legal travesty.

Related posts:

High Court denies request by embattled Asst. Commissioner to leave country; Court hears of 240 charges pending against him Attorney who was wrongfully arrested by SOCU among new Magistrates High Court throws out Magistrate’s decision to grant bail to two foreign drug trafficking accused Attorneys argue Magistrates’ Court has no jurisdiction in hearing extradition case