Prime Minister Mia Mottley shows off a Kensington Oval ready for T20 World Cup
Shanique Myrie

BU has resisted writing – up to now – about the Shanique Myrie matter. Many disagreed with Shanique Myrie’s legal advisors who made the decision to access the Caribbean Court Justice (CCJ) to rule on her (Myrie) right to move freely under the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas. After yesterday’s ruling by the CCJ to give special leave to Myrie to argue her case before the court, she must feel vindicated. This is against the background that many of our local legal beavers had opined that the CCJ has no jurisdiction in the matter until the case came to them on appeal from the Barbados courts. Barbados because we are a member of Caricom is bound by the interpretation of the  Caribbean Court of Justice  (CCJ) in all matters as it relates to the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas.

If we suck all of the emotion out of the matter, the Shanique Myrie versus the Government of Barbados case will be followed with great interest across the region. To what extent will this case threaten the discretion which traditionally has been exercised by officers at ports of entry in Caricom countries? If Myrie continues her winning ways, it potentially could provoke some  countries  who are signatories, to question obligations under the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramus as it relates to free movement of people.

To rub salt into the wound for some Myrie was awarded cost. To be fair it should be noted that at this stage the CCJ has given special leave to hear this matter i.e. the CCJ believes there is a case to be made. Myrie’s legal team now has to argue the case.

The following is reproduced from the Barbados Advocate and gives a good summary of the special sitting of the CCJ on the matter.

Myrie’s move

4/19/2012

CCJ rules Shanique Myrie has ‘arguable’ case

By Allison Ramsay

Jamaican national Shanique Myrie has been granted special leave to commence proceedings against the Barbados Government by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).

President of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), Sir Charles Dennis Byron, made this announcement at yesterday’s special sitting of the CCJ in Barbados to a packed Supreme Court 1 at the Supreme Court Building, Bridgetown, St. Michael, nearly three hours after the start of proceedings at 10 a.m.

After deliberating with The Hon. Mr. Justice Winston Anderson, The Hon. Mr. Justice Rolston Nelson, The Hon. Mr. Justice Jacob Wit and The Hon. Mme Justice Desiree Bernard, Sir Charles in his response to the arguments made by Michelle Brown, attorney-at-law for the applicant and lead counsel of Barbados’ legal team, attorney-at-law Roger Forde, QC said that the Justices’ obligation was to determine if the case was arguable and the “obligation to determine this issue was made simpler by the fact that the respondent has conceded that this is at least an arguable issue…”

Sir Charles granted Myrie’s legal team 14 days to file the application and granted the applicant the cost of filing the application. He noted that had the concessions been made before the proceedings had commenced, the cost of having the hearing would have been reduced.

It is expected that July may be the earliest that this case is called before the CCJ.

Basing her arguments on the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas and the CARICOM conference decision of 2007, Brown argued for 90 minutes that Myrie was denied right of entry and that denial was “unjustifiable, arbitrary and thus led to discrimination.”

Brown recounted Myrie’s allegation that on March 14, 2011, her client, then 22 years old, was originally allowed entry for a month when her passport was stamped but then two hours later found herself upstairs in a bathroom where she was allegedly finger raped by a female Immigration officer, abused with foul language, threatened and then denied entry into Barbados.

She said that Myrie, who intended to visit a friend for two weeks, still is unsure to this day what she did, what was the aim of denial of entry and the two alleged cavity searches. Brown further stated that bringing the case to the CCJ was the direct and best route in terms of time and cost.

Arguable case

Forde made his submission in about 20 minutes. Stating that he was not going to waste the Court’s time, he conceded that there was an “arguable case.” He explained to the media following the announcement, “I did not concede that she would succeed on the merits, but she has an arguable case. In that arguable case, she would state all of her facts, we would state ours and there is where it goes.” “Arguable does not mean you are right. When two people are in court, they both have arguable cases – but only one person wins,” Forde continued.

“The Court gave her permission to file that claim. The Court made no determination on it. Low threshold means that you have something that can be argued. It does not mean you would succeed in essence,” he said.

When asked her reaction to the outcome, Brown told the media: “We are very happy with the ruling. We met all the obligations we needed to make to argue the case that will be presented in Trinidad or wherever the CCJ meets. We presented the facts to keep the Court foregrounded and to keep the facts alive.” She said that Myrie feels “very happy now but is still anxious about what is going to happen in the future.”

A reserved Myrie arrived at the Supreme Court about 9:40 a.m. with her lawyers Brown and Marc Ramsay. O’Neil Francis appeared for the Attorney General’s Office in Jamaica. Myrie, dressed in a black pants suit, listened intently in the front row of the public gallery to the entire proceedings. Her lawyers embraced each other after it was announced that the special leave was granted.

Barbados’s legal team was comprised of Patterson Cheltenham, QC; Dr. David Berry, Senior Lecturer International Law and Caribbean Integration Law and Deputy Dean (Academic) at the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus and Donna Brathwaite of the Attorney General’s Office.

Sir Charles commended the Court for the high quality of professionalism exhibited.

The Court comprised of members of the legal fraternity, Government officials and others who were eager to witness the CCJ in operation in a space other than Trinidad and Tobago and to hear proceedings on this particular issue that has sparked controversy and debate on relations between Barbados and Jamaica.


  1. @ BAF

    Yes, I have a sneeky regard – to be utterly civilised – for what you say. LOL


  2. Everybody knows that the damn gal was coming into bim to sell herself at the garrison at night, stop pushing things under the carpet. bajan people need to wake up & see that all the other caribbean islands trying to take over bim. why is it that other people coming in to bim doing what the hell them like & bajans just sitting on them lazy ass doing nothing about it. stop crying down barbados


  3. “Everybody knows that the damn gal was coming into bim to sell herself at the garrison at night, stop pushing things under the carpet.”

    Wally will you go back to playing with your Wally?

    So the reason for the cavity search was to confirm that she picked fares for a living? Couldn’t the authorities be mistaken and admit to it? There was absolutely no proof that she was here to prostitute herself. Could Ms Myrie’s humiliation have been a result of spite and jealousy? And the sheer arrogance on the part of local authorities. Someone didn’t like how this very attractive Jamaican lady looked and presented herself. Perhaps she rebuffed unwanted advances?


  4. @RR. I don’t see how you can call my comments “arguably unnecessarily partisan and premature”. I have made no comments on the merit of the case, merely pointed out some aspects that ought to occur to any thinking person – that is hardly “partisan” – I have not questioned the right of the CCJ to take on this case over and above the Barbados judiciary, as our friend Casewell has done. As for “premature”, my questions are those that any thinking person would have had the moment Ms Myrie and the Jamaican government first complained, largely via the Jamaican press, some time ago. Therefore, the word “unnecessarily” really doesn’t compute either. I have also not voiced my opinions on the likely answers to those questions, leaving them to the individual judgment of BU’s readers.

    I am all too well aware of the arrogance and downright rudeness that exists in the civil service, especially in places like the Police, Customs and Immigration and, of course, the Registry. But that does not mean that they have acted illegally or infringed human rights on this occasion. It merely means that they MAY have been rude and unsympathetic in the lawful execution of their duties. Or they may indeed have acted wrongly. Only the evidence can take us there. And we have not seen that yet.

    Out of non-partisan fairness, we then have to look at the other side of the coin and consider if Ms Myrie, far from being a wronged party, is an opportunist determined to gain a financial advantage out of claiming that, in the exercise of their lawful rights, customs and immigration have acted illegally and in breach of her human rights.

    This comes at a time when I see from the London Telegraph that there is a great deal of controversy going on over the expulsion from Britain to Jordan to face terrorism charges of one Abu Qatada. The background can be found here. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/. That too is claimed to be a human rights case. And, I have no hesitation whatsoever in saying that Britain should deport his ass and if the European Court doesn’t like it, cut the connection with the court. France too is subject to the court, but that has not stopped them from deporting suspected terrorists and others without referring to the European Court at all.

    And do you think for one second that, if they considered it necessary, the immigration and customs agencies of the USA, Canada, UK, France, Australia etc., would hesitate to carry out cavity searches? Do you think that if you could not produce evidence of financial ability to support yourself in ANY country of which you are neither national nor resident that those countries would not deport you at once? Do you think if you could not provide adequate information on where you intended to stay while in those countries that they wouldn’t deport you at once? It is their right. It is our right in Barbados too. You are required to fill in a form when you enter Barbados. That form is a legal requirement and you sign it in the full knowledge that if you fail to give correct information on it, it is grounds for deportation. Most countries have these forms for non-nationals.

    So now the CCJ will consider the answers to these and other questions and decide whether Ms Myrie’s rights were breached. Then, there will be no question about whether she has had to submit her case to an allegedly (by Ms Myrie and the Jamaican government and press) biased and partisan Barbados court. She will get a fair and unbiased hearing and a chance to demonstrate that Barbados officials acted in breach (or in excess) of their rights. Or not, as the case may be.

    What this has done, however, is, I consider, a favour for Barbados. It has highlighted the unacceptable attitude (which we all well know and are correctly highlighted by Islandgal and Rosemary) of our public officials and the need to change that attitude. It has also highlighted the very proper and correct suggestions by ac that these searches or anything likely to breach human rights, ought to be video-recorded so that in future there IS no doubt.

    Or are you suggesting, RR, that Barbados ought to NOT have the right to ensure that non-nationals allowed in ought not to be held to certain standards and submit themselves to body searches and other investigations, just in case they scream “HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE” and take the matter to the CCJ?


  5. Hi, BAFBFP April 19, 2012 @ 11:32am

    Ps: I refrained from making any comment on the “alleged” search with good reason.


  6. @ Amused

    I agree with everything you say in the sense that you now express it. My concern, however, is not to fuel quite natural, as you say, speculation by speculation in advance of the evidence and thereby root in the public mind ‘opinions’ as ‘fact’. And I’m grateful to you for being the catalyst for my subsequent comment as I said… to answer the question in the last paragraph in the exact form it was expressed – NO


  7. Amused

    1. Wah is a terrorist?

    2. You really expect that human beings who admit that the environment and people who operate in it to be below an expected standard will have great difficulty in believing that a situation has arisen that justifies a complaint like Myrie’s?


  8. Oslo, Norway … nuff people get kill and the culprit is still referred to as a mass killer… never ever once as a terrorist … Wah is a terrorist Amused?


  9. @ Amused

    See the remarks of Wally, which I’ve just seen, as an example of what I meant.


  10. Racial profiling would be on trial in an attemopt to water down the laws against drug dealers.


  11. The issue raised by Lloyd Austin about Jamaica’s right to appeal should they lose the case was thought to be interesting by David Ellis. The question must be whether the CCJ is the final court to rule on all matters within the Revised Treaty of Chaguramus.

  12. The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall Avatar
    The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall

    @BU.David: “The question must be whether the CCJ is the final court to rule on all matters within the Revised Treaty of Chaguramus.

    If it’s anything like what happens in some other jurisdictions…

    If the “higher court” feels that the case can, and should, be dealt with a “lower court”, then they will order it so.

    Obviously this is not the case here. (No joke intended.)

    On a tangential, but related matter, does anyone know if the Barbados Air Port and Sea Port have DVR coverage of video cameras which can be used if such a situation occurs again?

    I believe such auditable evidence was promised, but I don’t know if it was implemented….


  13. David Ellis the parrot. For years he uses terms like “original jurisdiction” and when challenged on the meaning of the term would change the subject. You mean he had to wait until his go to lawyer was on air to finally clear it up for himself?

    As per David BU comment on Lloyd Austin’s observation, surely Jamaicans still have access to the Privy Council .. I hope I right so that Hal Gollop gun look foolish ’cause he couldn’t answer. But Ellis cut Gollop as he started to respond to Weekes’ query … what a pussy


  14. @ Square root of minus one

    If I got my hands on the videos of people being stripped searched I would start an web site for perverts like myself … There are billions of us out there …!

  15. The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall Avatar
    The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall

    @BAFBFP: “If I got my hands on the videos of people being stripped searched I would start an web site for perverts like myself …

    LOL… A common misunderstanding…

    The DVRed cameras (two of them) are just outside the examination / retention rooms, and facing outwards. Each are fed to different DVRs, which are under the control of different people.

    Additionally, there is at least a third camera which watches what the first two cameras can see. Controlled (and recorded), of course, by someone(s) who has no control over the first two cameras.

    What happens in the examination / interrogation rooms are private between the “client” and the “authorities”.

    But it cases like this, it would be ***really*** useful to know who entered the room.

    And when.


  16. Even if Myrie don’t win the allegation of cavity search, she will win the case of denied entry, since our immigration found nothing illegal on her. What is also interesting is the number of persons, both Jamaicans and Guyanese, who are lining up to sue Barbados for denied entry. Let’s hope for Barbados sake we win this case.


  17. @ Square root of minus one square

    These things operate Canada? … Seems to me that the process would require more man power than is currently needed. Problem for me as a tax payer of course, but what the heck, if it makes things better and more importantly keeps those nasty public servants in check and their hands off of my person …

  18. Observing (and questioning) Avatar
    Observing (and questioning)

    @chris
    I was wondering the same thing. Especially given the vociferous denials and “she lying” from our most senior government ministers.

  19. The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall Avatar
    The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall

    @Observing (and questioning): “I was wondering the same thing. Especially given the vociferous denials and “she lying” from our most senior government ministers.

    Yeah. Rather interesting…

    Lots of people are saying “she’s lying”, but we don’t have the evidence to prove otherwise.

    When we explain how to cover their ass, they go silent…

    Hmmmm….


  20. @Scout. I think you are overlooking the fact that visitors to Barbados, indeed to any country, have to provide an address at which they will be staying. Immigration has the right to verify this information and to decide if it is credible or not. If the information is not correct or is not credible, they have the right to deny entry. In the case of non-nationals and non-residents, that is. They also have the right to require that visitors provide information on how they intend to support themselves while in Barbados. If a visitor cannot provide that information, they can be refused entry. I have no idea if that is what happened, but do please consider it. It is not merely a question of not finding anything on her that would have the ability to disqualify her for entry to Barbados.


  21. @observing

    Bear in mind Barbados lead counsel Roger Forde has publicly stated that Barbados is contending Myries story is a fabrication.

  22. The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall Avatar
    The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall

    @BU.David: “Bear in mind Barbados lead counsel Roger Forde has publicly stated that Barbados is contending Myries story is a fabrication.

    How, exactly, do they intend to prove their claim?

    What evidence to they intend to bring forward?

  23. The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall Avatar
    The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall

    @Amused: “If a visitor cannot provide that information, they can be refused entry.

    Are they obligated to a body cavity search?

    Welcome to Barbados.

    Bend over.


  24. Smell the officer’s finiger after she has sworn not to have washed her hand in over two years

  25. The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall Avatar
    The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall

    @BAFBFP: “Smell the officer’s finiger after she has sworn not to have washed her hand in over two years

    That’s the crux of the matter, isn’t it?

    She said, she said.

    And we find ourselves in the CCJ….


  26. Court and learned counsel agree that the threshold for “special leave” to plead is low. Myrie met that standard. Barbados has not conceded the jurisdictional argument. It is only after Myrie’s pleadings in pursuit of her claim are filed, that the arguments on jurisdiction as adverted to by Forde QC can be properly adjudicated. Further the sovereignty question cannot be ignored where lawmaking processes are in question. Does the CCJ trump the Barbados parliament? Does the Caricom Heads of Government Conference trump the Barbados Parliament? Can the CCJ find answers to these questions in a Trade treaty?

  27. The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall Avatar
    The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall

    @BMcDonald: “Does the CCJ trump the Barbados parliament?

    When it comes to International Law, since Barbados signed the Treaty of Chaguaramas”…

    Yes.

    This was an important step in being taken seriously.

    Now that it is being used against us for this case is simply an opportunity for us to prove our seriousness.

    Why don’t we?


  28. Amused; But! perhaps I got it wrong, but wasn’t it reported that her passport was stamped entry allowed for 1 month or whatever? Shouldn’t the checks have been made before she was officially allowed entry as presumably attested by her passport? Isn’t the question that I think Caswell is asking is why would a functionary at the airport be allowed to change that permission, given that it is mandated by Law that such could only be done by the Minister responsible for Immigration?


  29. Amused

    Along with the above, wah is a terrorist ?…?


  30. No treaty can dictate that the immigartion officer allows someone into the country if deemed a risk to the country.


  31. @ balance

    i would not retract what ever comments i had said in connection to this case on previous threads but would reinforce my point that every country has a right to protect their brodersfrom drug mules or other forms of illegalities of those who would have had permission to enter the country. What ever the beef myrie had with the officials would have been documented and presented as evidence .so far in the arguments for her none of the allegations she myrie said verbally was brought into questions which begs the question as to whether such allegations were strong enough and basis for a case against the govt. hence her lawyers seem to have bypass such allegations and formed a case on her civil rights. it would be interesting to see if her lawyers would be putting forth any of the original allegations in respect to sexual abuse by the immigration officers.


  32. I have been visiting usa for over thirty years and in sept the year of the bombing i was sent to a holding centre because i had my hat turn backward and i ssurme it was because of that, that the white immirgration officer sent me to be investigated but as soon as i was about to sit down the black immirgation officer stamped my passport. i say that to say this, i had a multiple indefinite visa and yet i could have been denied entry, it is the judgment call of the immigation officer,

  33. The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall Avatar
    The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall

    @ac: “i had said in connection to this case on previous threads but would reinforce my point that every country has a right to protect their brodersfrom drug mules or other forms of illegalities of those who would have had permission to enter the country.

    Within reason…

    Just in case it isn’t clear, Barbados is the defendant here. And equally clear, the plaintiff wasn’t body-packing drugs at the time in question.

    Because I honestly don’t know I will ask here: do we know the name(s) of the Barbados immigration officer(s) who are alleged to have been involved in this incident?

    Separate question: why are we (read: Barbados) so sure they did no wrong?


  34. We … you mean ac


  35. one does not have to be body packing drugs to be searched asked little old gran mamas entering the USA.


  36. Hope we are not moving away from the import of the CCJ ruling for Myrie when the matter is heard. To focus on the other issues being is secondary.

  37. The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall Avatar
    The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall

    @ac: “one does not have to be body packing drugs to be searched asked little old gran mamas entering the USA.

    But a body cavity search demands a certain amount of presupposition, and precaution.

    Even when entering the “Great” US of A….

  38. The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall Avatar
    The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall

    @BU.David: “Hope we are not moving away from the import of the CCJ ruling for Myrie when the matter is heard.

    I hope not too.

    Do you know, David, if Barbados now has DVR cameras at our ports?

    Do you know the names of the immigration officers involved with the Myrie incident?


  39. @Chris

    Even if the info is known what would be the benefit in making it public? What can be stated is that it is reported Immigration was unhappy with Myrie’s accommodation arrangements which led to the mess we find ourselves. The issue now has grown bigger than an alleged woman of the night looking for work.


  40. @ entity

    your comment answer the reason for the body search of myrie presuming there was such as of now no eveidence has been presented except what myrie said!

  41. The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall Avatar
    The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall

    @BU.David: “The issue now has grown bigger than an alleged woman of the night looking for work.

    Indeed. Much bigger.

    Including a certain Minister saying that she was sure that what was alleged to have happened did not happen.

    I find it interesting how we find ourselves here.

    And, further, that we’ve apparently done absolutely nothing to ensure that we don’t find ourselves here again.

    I ask, once again (to deafening silence), do our ports now have auditable DVR cameras?

    If not, why not? Were they not promised immediately after this particular issue first reared its ugly head?


  42. @Chris Halsall asked ” do our ports now have auditable DVR cameras?”

    It is Barbados. Will need a specialist overseas company to install the cameras and train the customs officers.


  43. @Chris

    Perhaps Caswell can confirm. The latest info BU read on the matter is that some work was started but not sure if it was completed.


  44. @ BAF

    Now you know I have the highest regard for you. But I must take you up on one thing. You have now made the ‘famous finger’ something which might just find its way into law books to be argued about in moots and on examination papers, into memoirs and quite possibly serious feminist studies. But I want you to reflect on my caveat to Amused (blessings be upon him) that we should be careful to distinguish between fact and fiction. With this in mind, please come clean: What is your evidence for saying it was the index finger rather than some other?

  45. The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall Avatar
    The entity who used to be known as Chris Halsall

    @BU.David: “Perhaps Caswell can confirm. The latest info BU read on the matter is that some work was started but not sure if it was completed.

    I find it absolutely amazing… It is well known that you can’t even approach a US or UK airport or seaport without being observed by an HD camera. Once inside (but before passing though security) you are observed by at least three.

    All of these are fed into computer vision (AI) systems, which apply all kinds of interesting heuristics. Plus, of course, the raw feeds are recorded by at least two different systems at different locations, and are available for review to law enforcement authorities.

    Here in Barbados it appears we only have low resolution NTSC cameras at our ports, which aren’t even recorded by the kind of DVR “kit” a consumer can buy at PriceSmart for BDS $2000. Almost certainly not redundantly recorded in a manner appropriate for a court room.

    Hmmmm….


  46. any word from the woman in hillaby that myrie gave as the person she was staying at, who later refused to come? what did investigations reveal?
    hmmmmm.


  47. Amused
    There was some-one at the airport who came to collect Miss Myrie, immigration, claims that man was a known playboy who brings in girls for shows, so they refused entry. What about the young bajan guy whose Jamaican wife was refused entry quite recently, he too should question by whose authority she was being denied entry.


  48. robert ross

    Welcome to the world of scroundrals … Jesus H Christ man yah killin’ me … ha ha ha


  49. “Everybody knows that the damn gal was coming into bim to sell herself at the garrison at night, stop pushing things under the carpet. bajan people need to wake up & see that all the other caribbean islands trying to take over bim. why is it that other people coming in to bim doing what the hell them like & bajans just sitting on them lazy ass doing nothing about it. stop crying down barbados’
    There we go again, speculating and vilifying.Obviously, yhe immigration authorities didn’t think so or were not in possession of this information when they granted her right of entry for one month. Usually suspicious individuals are directed to the guyanese bench for further questioning and possible deportation with the right of entry not granted As far as i am aware, that is the extent of the role of the Immigration Authorities.
    When right of entry is granted, then the customs division is the agency responsible for allowing the permitted entrant to exit provided they are satisfied that the permitted entrant national or non-national have complied with the laws of Barbados. Should they not comply, then the Police is requested to assist the Customs in further investigations which could involve body searches depending on the nature of the investigations and the outcomes of which would be arrest and not deportation
    Two things about this incident boggle my mind. What happened between the time Ms Myrie was grantedone month’s stay and right of entry to attract the attention of the Immigration Authorities and does the Immigration authorities have the right to search her?


  50. .so far in the arguments for her none of the allegations she myrie said verbally was brought into questions which begs the question as to whether such allegations were strong enough and basis for a case against the govt. hence her lawyers seem to have bypass such allegations and formed a case on her civil rights. it would be interesting to see if her lawyers would be putting forth any of the original allegations in respect to sexual abuse by the immigration officers”
    my friend, if you were following hearing you would understand that the lawyers first had to prove that Ms Myrie had a right to be heard. That now out of the way, the other issues can now be dealt with.

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading