GUYANA - Magistrate Dylon Bess granted a request by lawyers representing Marlan DaSilva for private hearings of the preliminary inquiry (PI) and paper comitial proceedings.
Thirty-two-year- old DaSilva is accused of killing his 27-year-old wife Kenesha Vaughn. He appeared at the Diamond Magistrates’ Court and was represented by attorney Glenn Hanoman and Everton Singh-Lammy.
During last Tuesday’s hearing, Magistrate Bess ruled with the guidance and authority of the criminal law procedure act, that members of the public and media be excluded from attending the PI to avoid potential prejudice to the accused. He noted that should any part of the proceeding raise issues of public interest that warrants some amount of limited disclosure, the court is willing to consider granting access to a summary public reporting purpose with strict limitations to avoid the potential prejudice to the accused. However, the prosecution must make an application to the court.
A release from the court following the hearing stated that the defence has objected to the presence of the press pursuant to Sections 62 and 63 of the Criminal Law (Procedure) Act, Cap. 10:01, arguing that public access at this stage could prejudice the accused’s right to a fair trial and jeopardise the integrity of the committal process. It said the prosecution has responded with oral submissions, emphasising the importance of public scrutiny and the role of the media in ensuring transparency in judicial proceedings. The release said that the court acknowledges the vital role the media plays in a democratic society. “A free press contributes to public awareness, accountability, and confidence in the justice system,” it stated. However, it pointed out that the principle of open justice is not absolute, particularly in preliminary inquiries, which are not trials, but investigative proceedings intended to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to commit the accused to stand trial.
The court cited section 62 of the Act, which empowers it to regulate the conduct of the proceedings and exclude the public or any portion thereof, if it is of the opinion that such exclusion is necessary in the interest of justice, public morality, or the protection of witnesses or parties. It noted that section 63 of the Act, further reinforces the court’s discretion to control attendance and conduct. (Kaieteur News)
