…as mother moves to CCJ for urgent hearing
The high-profile case of prominent New York-based Guyanese Marcus Bisram is taking another turn, as proceedings have been filed at the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) – the region’s highest court, which is based in Trinidad and Tobago.
This recent move was mounted by Bisram’s mother Sharmila Inderjali, who was just last week denied an application for urgent hearing by the Appeal Court of Guyana, which essentially sought to expedite the judicial process regarding a bid to have the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) withdraw a murder case. Appellate Court Justice Rishi Persaud, acting Justices Dr Arif Bulkan and Rafiq Khan, presided over the matter.
Marcus Bisram
and mother of Bisram
Bisram is accused of having arranged Berbice carpenter Fiyazz Narinedatt’s death after Narinedatt had rejected the overseas-based Bisram’s sexual advances at a party two years ago. For the past year, Bisram had been detained at a New York facility as his legal team continued to oppose extradition to Guyana, citing what it argues are several inconsistences in the prosecution’s case.
However, when the Appeal Court ruled unfavourably towards Bisram’s mother, she was ordered to pay the State G$250,000 in court costs.
In court documents seen by this newspaper, Inderjali filed her application to the CCJ last week. Her lawyers include attorneys Sanjeev Datadin and Siand Dhurjon, while the respondent in the matter is listed as State Counsel Stacy Goodings from the Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). Goodings has been appearing as the prosecutor in the preliminary inquiry (PI) after the DPP had taken over the case from Police at the Magistrate’s Court in Berbice.
According to the case filed in the CCJ, the applicant is seeking an order granting her special leave against the Appeal Court’s July 31, 2018 decision to dismiss her February 6, 2018 application. Inderjali also is seeking to have the Caribbean-based Justices abridge the time for which the application can be heard, while the applicant is also requesting court costs.
In their case filed at the CCJ, opposing the Appellate Court’s ruling that refused her application, Bisram’s mother observed that the Court “failed to appreciate the uniqueness of the case” and its “special circumstances”. She outlined that the Prosecution’s evidence relies on that of a single witness, who is youthful and is of “limited intellect”. The mother said also that the Police never alleged that there is any other evidence against Bisram.
The applicant’s case outlines that she mounted proceedings at the High Court before Justice Navindra Singh last year, where she sought an Order Nisi to prohibit the DPP from pursing the murder charge which was instituted on March 7, 2017 against Bisram. The applicant’s grounds were that continued prosecution of her son would, among other things, be “unlawful, unconstitutional, malicious, and without legal foundation. This was premised on several events that transpired during the PI.
During the High Court proceedings, Inderjali also sought an Order Nisi of Mandamus to compel the DPP to “wholly withdraw” and discontinue Bisram’s murder charge, and observed similar objections as outlined in the previous order.
Justice Singh heard the case on November 24, 2017 and refused the orders. The applicant appealed his decision 6 days later.
In her appeal to the CCJ, Inderjali accepted that the case is of great general and public importance, and that it concerns the exercise of the DPP’s discretion, which she says is essential to the proper administration of justice and public confidence in the judicial system. However, Bisram’s mother details that the Appeal Court’s order was “erroneous and unjust”, adding that her case has good prospects for success.
Contrary to Inderjali’s characterisation of the Appellate Court’s decision, the Justices there had suggested that the filing of the urgency appeal and associated multiple litigations amounted to an abuse of the court’s process.
The Appeal Court’s decision was read by acting Appellate Justice Dr. Arif Bulkan, who opined last Tuesday that this most recent case was the third such application that sought similar reliefs – these being to compel the DPP not to continue prosecution against Bisram. It was indicated that a separate motion was brought before another judge in a separate county of Guyana.
Bisram’s extradition order was signed in October last by US Judge Peggy Kuo. He was charged in absentia in 2016 for the murder of the 27-year-old Number 70 Village Corentyne carpenter Narinedatt.
Radesh Motie, Diadatt Datt, Harri Paul Parsram, Orlando Dickie and Niran Yacoob were all charged. Two of the accused had allegedly confessed to investigators that they were ordered by the overseas-based Guyanese businessman to dump the carpenter’s body on the Number 70 Public Road to make his death seem the result of a hit and run accident.
Additionally, the businessman’s mother and sister have been accused of offering bribes to Police ranks to “duck the case”. Since commencement of the preliminary inquiry in Berbice, several persons have been accused of witness tampering.
