Latest update November 8th, 2024 1:00 AM
Latest News
CCJ rejects application by convicted ex-soldiers
Court Journal
2009 gold dealer murder…
By Renay Sambach
The Waterfalls Magazine – The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) on Thursday denied a Special Leave Application made by two former members of the Guyana Defence Force (GDF), who were convicted of a 2009 murder and seeking an appeal.
Renay Sambach
The duo formerly of the Guyana Coast Guard Division, Sherwyn Harte and Deon Greenidge were among three tried and convicted for the murder of Dwieve Kant Ramdass, who was killed on 20 August 2009. The third person Devon Gordon did not seek an appeal.
The men were convicted of the murder on July 2, 2013 and on July 3, 2013, were sentenced to death on a mandatory basis under section 100 of the Criminal Law Offences Act (CLOA) Cap 8:01.
The three soldiers robbed Ramdass of $17 million and threw him overboard where he drowned. They then divided the stolen money among themselves equally.
The trio had appealed their sentences to the Court of Appeal. Harte and Greenidge argued that the death penalty was an unconstitutional punishment.
Subsequently, the Appellate Court upheld the convictions but agreed that the original death sentences should be vacated and replaced by life sentences with tariffs requiring the two men to serve 18 years in prison before being eligible for parole.
It is against this judgment that Harte and Greenidge sought special leave to appeal to the CCJ, against the oral decision of the Guyana’s Court of Appeal, dated December 22, 2022.
At the CCJ, Greenidge sought permission to appeal his conviction and both Harte and Greenidge sought permission to appeal the sentence imposed by the Court of Appeal upon them and to challenge the constitutionality of the death penalty itself.
Greenidge sought permission to appeal his conviction on the ground that the evidence against him consisted solely of the contents of his caution statement, which did not disclose any prior plan to murder or participate in the murder of the deceased.
Harte and Greenidge also sought to obtain an order from the CCJ declaring the death penalty to be “unconstitutional” and, therefore, could not be lawfully imposed in Guyana on anyone.
From (L-R): Dead: Dwieve Kant Ramdass and (murder convicts) Devon Gordon, Deon Greenidge, and Sherwyn Harte
The CCJ, in a judgment authored by Justice Winston Anderson, took the view in relation to Greenidge’s conviction, that Greenidge did not establish any realistic possibility that there had been a miscarriage of justice. It was stated that there was ample evidence in the caution statement and the circumstantial evidence on which a jury, properly directed, could have reached the conclusion that Greenidge was party to the joint enterprise to rob and murder the deceased.
The Court also noted that there was no evidence of any attempt by Greenidge to assist the deceased when he was in distress or otherwise to disassociate himself from participating in the heinous crime against a citizen of the Republic whose safety he had sworn to protect.
Regarding the constitutionality of the death penalty, the CCJ said that Harte and Greenidge faced no threat of execution, so the arguments raised on this issue were purely academic in nature. The CCJ reaffirmed that the Court will only hear academic appeals in exceptional circumstances.
Harte and Greenidge also took issue with some of the reasoning of the Court of Appeal regarding the death penalty being a “saved law” from the colonial era. As such, the CCJ reminded that it had expounded clear views on the issue of the savings clause and naturally, if there is any variance between those views and the reasoning of the Court of Appeal, the views of the CCJ must prevail.
Harte and Greenidge also contended that the Court of Appeal did not adhere to the proper sentencing methodology in vacating the death penalty and imposing life sentences with tariffs. The CCJ, bearing in mind that the offenders were members of the Defence Force who robbed and murdered an innocent citizen, found that there was no ground for regarding the sentence imposed as excessive or so manifestly outside the mainstream of sentences as would merit granting leave to appeal it.
Furthermore, the CCJ highlighted that the Court of Appeal had imposed that the offenders must serve a sentence less than the minimum of 20 years. Therefore, the Court stated that the applicants had no basis for complaint.
On these bases, the application for special leave was dismissed, with no orders as to costs.
- Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), Court Journal, Guyana Coast Guard Division, Sherwyn Harte, Special Leave Application
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
A lesson from the bread lines of America
…Peeping Tom Kaieteur News- If the American elections of 2024 delivered any one lesson to the rest of the world, it... more
Rising Gun Crimes in the Caribbean: Urgent Action required by all
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – There is an alarming surge in gun-related violence, particularly among younger... more
Weekend Cartoon
