By FRANCIS JOSEPH
Two former prisoners have been awarded a total of $3.5 million in damages for the failure of the State to periodically review their sentences.
Justice Robin Mohammed ruled for Leslie Tiwari and Robert Noreiga in constitutional motions brought against the Attorney General in 2023. Costs were also awarded to their attorneys, led by Rajiv Persad SC.
The judge awarded $1.7 million in compensatory damages and another $150,000 in vindictory damages to Tiwari. Noreiga is to receive $1.5 million in compensatory damages and another $150,000 in vindictory damages.
THE CASE
Both ex-prisoners filed constitutional motions on the 4th of October, 2019 against the AG for breach of their constitutional rights arising from the Prison Authorities’ failure to conduct periodic reviews of their sentences.
Although the actions were brought separately, they were heard together because the legal issues raised and the reliefs sought were practically identical. After Tiwari’s conviction in 1989 for rape, two counts of robbery with aggravation, and arson, he was sentenced to 30 years’ imprisonment + 20 strokes for rape, 10 years (consecutive) for first robbery, 10 years (concurrent) for second robbery, and life imprisonment (consecutive) for arson.
Having spent almost 34 years in prison, his sentences for rape and robbery passed, but he continued to serve a life sentence for arson. Noreiga was convicted in 1994 for manslaughter and sentenced to life imprisonment, with a minimum term of 15 years before release. He had spent almost 29 years in prison at the time of filing the action. This significantly exceeded the minimum term required by his sentence.
Tiwari’s sentencing review in 2023, Madame Justice Nalini Singh ruled that the appropriate term of imprisonment for retribution was 25 years from the date of conviction. Tiwari was therefore released forthwith. Noreiga’s sentencing review similarly took place in 2023. It was heard before Madame Justice Gail Gonzales, who determined that continued detention served no useful purpose after Noreiga had spent 29 years in prison. Noreiga, too, was released immediately.
On the 27th of March 2023, the Court granted judgment in favour of the ex-prisoners.
The Order:
1. The ex-prisoners are entitled to the following declarations against the AG:
a. A declaration that the delay and or failure of the Governor in Council or the Prison Authorities to conduct a review of their sentences in the circumstances of their case is unconstitutional;
b. A declaration that the delay and or failure of the Governor in Council or the Prison Authorities to conduct a review of the sentences of the Claimants in the circumstances of their case amounted to an infringement of their rights not to be deprived of liberty except by due process;
c. A declaration that the delay and or failure of the Governor in Council or the Prison Authorities to conduct a review of their sentences in the circumstances of their case amounted to an infringement of their rights not to be subjected to arbitrary detention;
d. A declaration that the delay and or failure of the Governor in Council or the Prison
Authorities to conduct a review of their sentences in the circumstances of their case amounted to an infringement not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment;
e. A declaration that the delay and or failure of the Governor in Council or the Prison Authorities to conduct a review of their sentences in the circumstances of their case amounted to an infringement not to be deprived of procedural provisions that give effect to their rights;
f. A declaration that the Claimants are entitled to have regular reviews of their sentences of no more than four-year intervals and the failure to conduct such reviews was and continues to be a breach of the Claimants rights under sections 4(a), 5(2)(a), (b), and (h) of the Constitution.
g. A declaration that the review process is subject to the principles of natural justice.
