For the past 6 months, Belize City Resident Allyson Major has been suing the Government and officers of the Gang Suppression Unit. He and his attorney, Anthony Sylvestre, say he was a prime example of everything wrong with Firearms Amendment Act of 2010.
As viewers will remember, that law was passed as the Barrow Government's "get tough on crime" measure. It imposed collective responsibility for individual wrongdoing - where entire families were detained for any illegal firearm found in their house.
That's what caught Allyson Major in April of 2012, when he was arrested along with 6 other persons. Even though he was not present at the time of the search he was charged and remanded for 38 days. He fought the charges and won in November 2013.
Major then sued the government and Justice Michelle Arana heard his case, the first suit against the Firearms Amendment Act of 2010. His attorney, Anthony Sylvestre, argued that the law violates the citizen's constitutional right to his freedom. He said that the law shifts the burden of proof from innocent until proven guilty, to guilty until proven innocent.
He told the court that because of the amendment to the Firearms Act, police officers are not afforded the mechanism to investigate before detaining and charging a large group of people who may not have any connection to the illegal weapon.
Justice Michelle Arana agreed and concluded, quote, "I do not see anything which would lead me to find that this amendment was anything other than a spontaneous reaction to an admittedly terrifying, frustrating, and vexing problem plaguing Belizean society… I am constrained to agree with Mr. Sylvestre's submission that the effect of the amendment of having all persons above the age of criminal culpability living at a premises…being detained, arrested, and charged is unreasonable, arbitrary and excessive, and as a consequence, unconstitutional." End Quote.
The judge refers to the ordeal that Major endured as an injustice, which was compounded by the fact that he was charged and remanded despite the fact that another defendant had accepted guilt for the unlicensed weapons.
It's a win for Allyson Major, but does it have any implications on the "draconian" Firearms Amendment Act? That's what we asked his attorney today after they stepped out of court:
Anthony Sylvestre, Attorney for Allyson Major
"This matter was brought to the Supreme Court and we sought a declaration that when he was charged under this provision, the police so violated his constitutional right not to be charged unless there's reasonable suspicion. We also challenge that upon him being charged under this now is accepted draconian and dubious provision of the firearms act, when he was so charged his right to presume innocence was also violated. The learned trial judge, Madam Justice Arana, uphold our submissions and ruled in our favor granting the declarations that we had prayed and sought. Also awarded general damages in the sum of $5,000, special damages in the sum of $6,500 and cost which is to say that government is to pay Mr. Major's cost and the Attorney's cost. It is a landslide win because as I have indicated, it is everything that we sought and we did indeed achieve what we set out to achieve. That is to vindicate the fact that Mr. Major should not have been charged any at all but because of the way that draconian firearms provision operated, it led to that ill consequence, it led to that unjust consequence. a consequence as I said, is not only a major but many people have in fact had to endure and it would appear that perhaps maybe those persons quite properly could also see if their constitutional rights have been infringed."
Daniel Ortiz
"Do you think that the precedence set here strengthens the case of the opposition that this law needs to be revised immediately?"
Anthony Sylvestre, Attorney for Allyson Major
"Well I do believe, as indicated, they were following the enactment of the provisions. There were many civic groups and indeed the opposition had implored the government."
Reporter
"And even suggested their own amendment"
Anthony Sylvestre, Attorney for Allyson Major
"And even suggested their own amendment. I should say that the government did do an amendment, but when you look at that amendment, it does not go as far. There are persons in Mr. Major's situation who could still be necessarily caught up into the web."
Reporter
"In other words the judge is saying that you were falsely imprisoned."
Allyson Major
"That's right, Mr. Sylvester said that alright."
Of important note is that the judge did not award vindicatory damages to Major. This award of damages is usually given as a clear signal to the Government to teach them a lesson.
Email
Print