Submitted by Anthony Davis

Prominent attorney Andrew Pilgrim has raised alarm about a piece of legislation, already approved in the House of Assembly, which removes the rights of accused persons to remain silent.  According to Pilgrim, the Evidence (Amendment) Bill 2014, which is set to go before the Senate on Friday, was last year pushed through the House without proper debate and public consultation and he argued it was injustice” – Barbados Today 14 January, 2015 

Just when I thought that this Government could do us nothing more to deflate the egos of the populace of this country, up it comes with a piece of skulduggery which takes us deeper into the Mariana Trench. Every man jack in Barbados must stand up and be counted on this one!

It is no use saying I’m a police officer, lawyer, bricklayer, or whatever trade or calling one deems fit to mention, because it would apply to every one of us. This is, according to Minister Steve Blackett, a “people-centred” Government. Please tell me where the centre is? Mr. Blackett probably means concentric circles with them at the centre of all of the others, and after them the deluge.

It is unfathomable how any Government which should be caring for its citizens and those who choose to make Barbados their home – and let us not forget who have to pay them from the leftovers after all of the taxes with which they have burdened us – has the audacity to try to take away our rights as laid down in our Constitution.

If we do not have the same as what the Americans call their “Miranda” rights – after a US Supreme Court ruling establishing such rights in 1972 – read to us we would be up the creek without a paddle. Why must everything be done covertly by this Government?

This sneak amendment must be brought before Parliament and those abiding in this country, if not it must be deemed null and void, because nothing in our Constitution should be changed without it being discussed in Parliament, but it was only done during the absence of the Opposition. I think that it is high time that this Government step down, or the Governor General should make them do so.

As long as any Government encroaches on the rights of its populace, and wants to turn it into a dictatorship, there should be only one way out!

This was done so covertly that not one of them thought about his constituents and that he must go to them during the next election, but I guess that they could not care less. They should be made to forfeit every penny they should get as pension from the taxpayers of this country.

Do you think that the many tourists who visit Barbados will be pleased to hear that the Government wants to take away the “Miranda” rights of its populace, thereby totally disregarding its Constitution by subterfuge?

Those in the EU, Canada, and the USA would look for other places to spend their money. How many people do you hear spending their holidays in Russia or North Korea?

You may deceive all the people part of the time, and part of the people all the time, but not all the people all the time.” –

Abraham Lincoln

31 responses to “Evidence (Amendment) Bill 2014: The Right to Remain Silent!”


  1. When people like us or Bushie or others talk about where the world is right now all kinds of people call us by many derogatory names.

    What do you expect? All over the world the moneyed classes are afraid of sustain uprisings against them and everywhere these kinds of actions are being taken and will continue to be taken to protect vested interests.

    In any event the police in Barbados has never recognized any right to remain silent. Up to now nearly 90% of convictions are still based on confessions. Police beatings are fear of beating, not the newer psychological tricks as use elsewhere, are widely in use, still.


  2. This is absolute madness. What possible reason would compel a government to do this.

    I am not a lawyer so help me understand what happens if a Canadian citizen or an American citizen is arrested in Barbados.

    What are the police going to say as they have 2 pitbulls sitting in the corner….

    “you have no miranda rights so start talking or we gine lick in yuh brassbowl and feed yuh to de dogs.

    I must be mistaken. NO MIRANDA RIGHTS IN BARBADOS.

    Tell me I am wrong.


  3. U.S. attorney general bans asset seizure by local police

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – State and local police in the United States will no longer be able to use federal laws to justify seizing property without evidence of a crime, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said on Friday.

    The practice of local police taking property, including cash and cars, from people that they stop, and of handing it over to federal authorities, became common during the country’s war on drugs in the 1980s.

    Holder cited “safeguarding civil liberties” as a reason for the change in policy.

    The order directs federal agencies who have collected property during such seizures to withdraw their participation, except if the items collected could endanger the public, as in the case of firearms.

    Holder said the ban was the first step in a comprehensive review the Justice Department has launched of the program.

    http://news.yahoo.com/u-attorney-general-bans-asset-seizure-local-police-195542428.html

  4. St George's Dragon Avatar
    St George’s Dragon

    Where is the original of this legislation? Can anyone post the text of what is proposed or say where we can read it?


  5. Waste of time anyway. If someone is desperate, they will just lie.

    Look at our ‘fine examples’ in the land today…… dem LIE bad.

    ‘Sir, did you see Mr.Johnson.,….’

    Silence? Or a flat out ‘No’.

    Sometimes silence means more.


  6. One point though, nothing overrides the Constitution, thus, this can be challenged in Court as unconstitutional, surely?

    An amendment to the Constitution requires a two thirds majority of Parliament, no?


  7. @St.Georges Dragon

    You can download the Evidence Act here.

    http://www.barbadosparliament.com/bills/details/57

    Did anyone expect a useless Senate to challenge the Lower House based on public outcry? The fact a prominent lawyer feels it necessary to strongly object shows the change was NOT properly socialized?


  8. Interesting to note government Senator Verla Depeiza who is known to be against the change absent herself from the bite in the Senate. The trickery!

    Interesting to know how the Independents voted.

    http://www.barbadostoday.bb/2015/01/17/on-solid-ground/


  9. Miranda or not seeing a bajan who did not want to talk …would be like seeing a unicorn


  10. lawson ”January 17, 2015 at 7:09 AM # Miranda or not seeing a bajan who did not want to talk …would be like seeing a unicorn”

    Hilarious. ‘Oh, now you see, Nesta pass by Enid house an fire de roclk….she Brudda (de one that got tings wid de woman down by the Port, you know, Merla sister) get vex an pick up de stick…’


  11. crusoe you have to speak slower its hard to understand ya

  12. HAMILTON A HILL Avatar

    One question. When the average Joe [not the Sandy Lane massive] is locked in one of those rooms at the CID or the dungeon at Oistins, with two or three of the Goons we got bout here, the only time Miranda is mentioned is if she is somebody’s girlfriend. Why we never properly address that?


  13. How is it that the DLP/BLP governments can enact all types of legislation, cultural legislation, evidence legislation, bullshit legislation and no INTEGRITY LEGISLATION….steupss


  14. CANADA

    “”The Canadian Charter warning reads (varies by police service): “You are under arrest for _________ (charge), do you understand? You have the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay. We will provide you with a toll-free telephone lawyer referral service, if you do not have your own lawyer. Anything you say can be used in court as evidence. Do you understand? Would you like to speak to a lawyer?” (See: R. v. Hebert [1990] 2 S.C.R. 151)”

  15. St George's Dragon Avatar
    St George’s Dragon

    This change may not simply be the Barbados Government changing the law in order to crack down on civil rights. There are other countries around the world which have similar laws to what is proposed.
    The law was changed in the UK some years ago:
    “Major reform to the questioning and treatment of suspected offenders occurred in 1984 when the Police and Criminal Evidence Act came into force. …. the right to silence was amended by allowing adverse inferences to be drawn at a court hearing in cases where a suspect refuses to explain something, and then later produces an explanation. In other words the jury is entitled to infer that the accused fabricated the explanation at a later date, as he refused to provide the explanation during police questioning. The jury is also free to make no such inference. The new caution is:
    You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.”
    Thanks to Wikipedia – I hope it is reliable) other countries:
    Australia – general right to silence with no adverse inferences being drawn but case law says “where a defendant answers some police questions, but not others, an inference may sometimes be drawn about the questions he refused to answer”.
    Germany – “Though the courts may not draw inference from the complete silence of the accused in any stage of criminal proceedings, inference may be drawn if the accused is selectively silent.”
    The problem here, as frequently with this Government, is that there is no advanced warning of these sorts of changes, so no opportunity to debate the rights and wrongs of the change. Surely a consultation paper should have been circulated; stakeholders given the opportunity to comment and debate etc. Instead, we get the situation (as with the Antiquities Bill) where a piece of legislation is put before Parliament which proposes some major change in the status quo and it is the first thing anyone has seen about it.
    Other countries issue consultation papers (Green and White papers in the UK). Can’t we do something like that. It would help to forge some sort on National consensus on issues such as these and save the Government from stumbling into more PR disasters in the future.


  16. Also note the Opposition was absent from parliament when the matter was ‘debated’, there is democracy at work for you. The fact similar is enacted in other jurisdictions gives favourable consideration dies not mean wholesale adoption.

  17. pieceuhderockyeahright Avatar
    pieceuhderockyeahright

    With all due respect to mr Andrew Pilgrim the issue of the rush that accompanied this law is not as important as what the law contains.

    I would hope that honourable counsel would use him luminary skills and share with ole mens and other persons ignorant of the nuances of this lofty discipline if what is contained is so deleterious to the freedoms of our citizens that this haste should merit attention.

    His remarks remind me of a flawed syllogism ” minibus men drive without due care and attention”. “People can be killed by those who drive without due care and attention” ” all minibus men should be incarcerated for the way they drive”

    Please tell de ole man what things in de law I gots to be afraid of e.g. If I was thinking bout going out wid Sunshine Sunny Shine for non honourable purposes and a policeman stop me and ask me whey I going and I answer and say I going by AC (the female among legion, to be sure) is it possible that when Michael Lashley sen de CoP fuh me dat dem cud say that I am guilty since I withheld crucial information at the time of questioning?


  18. We are all cognisant of the fact that this government’s policy is, “My way or the highway”. No one will voice their disapproval at any decision made by this government for fear of being shot or his/her head cracked. However, the citizens of the country knows that every day a night follows and there is a conclusion somewhere in the near future. It is hope this registers with this lot that, they are, “here today gone tomorrow” bunch of despots, which will be removed, with no chance of being elected again for the next 50 years. My message: enjoy it while you can.


  19. Just saw a replay of the OJ Simpson trial.In it Mark Furman denied using the N word in the prior 10 years.A tape was subsequently produced in which he used the N word several times and it was in the recent past.Later in the trial he was asked if he had planted evidence at the scene of the crime.He took the 5th.Jurors,20 years later confirmed that Furman was the catalyst of doubt and they felt the police had planted evidence at the scene.The scenario here is what that amendment is about.
    Furman denied using the N word.A tape was produced that proved him a liar.Then he took the 5th when asked if he had planted evidence at the scene .The jury had reasonable doubt about a guilty verdict based on Furman’s testimony and found the defendant not guilty.Furman remained silent on a crucial question that followed logically on a lie he told the court.


  20. Andrew Pilgrim should join the political fray with a third party. He has the personality that Barbadians would support. He is a lawyer but very down to earth as a person.


  21. @ Clone January 18, 2015 at 8:17 AM #

    Andrew Pilgrim should join the political fray with a third party. He has the personality that Barbadians would support. He is a lawyer but very down to earth as a person.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    I agree 100%.


  22. @ Clone & Anthony:

    Just remember that power corrupts, and absolute power in the hands of any bajan where there are no checks and balances we’ll be absolutely screwed.
    As for Andrew Pilgrim or anyone else, well, except for me.


  23. BARBADIANS TRUST ATTORNEYS, says president of the Barbados Bar Association, Tariq Khan. – See more at: http://www.nationnews.com/nationnews/news/62261/bar#sthash.CY85h6GX.dpuf


  24. Challenge for the new third party.

    Freedom of information act.

    Integrity legislation.

    Full disclosure of assets and liabilities of all candidates for election.

  25. pieceuhderockyeahright Avatar
    pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ hants

    Add a fourth

    A Clear Plan for Regrowing the Economy of Barbados (in 5 years) (with a team with the actual credentials to do so)

    10 page manifesto with seven pages devoted to the fourth Objective and once they have the skills THEY GOT THE OLE MAN VOTE

    So that plan is

    (i) Freedom of information act.

    (ii) Integrity legislation. Full disclosure of assets and liabilities of all candidates for election

    (iii) a Revision of our Defunct Education System and the $500M wastage every year and

    (iv) A Clear Plan for Regrowing the Economy of Barbados (in 5 years)


  26. @pieceuhderockyeahright ,

    Agreed.


  27. Can anyone put the finger on why neither party put Freedom of Information act or Integrity legislation into law.

    I have a feeling it has nothing to do with the political class but the those persons who fund political parties and expect the kickbacks that we are seeing happening in the country everyday.

    Eg Why could the government not give all the NCC laid off workers a contract to cut the ABC highway like they give this particular person who have these small white contractors hiring some of the same workers to do the job.


  28. @Clone

    You are on the right track. There is benefit in giving the contract to Maloney who has the Clarke boys fronting the deal. Clico has to be replaced and the replacement has to be rewarded.


  29. Barbados will only get Integrity Legislation when it is tied to a loan from the UK,Canadian or US governments,so lobby the High Commissions and the Embassy if you want significant changes in Political Barbados


  30. The amendment is being discussed on the Peoples Business.The Attorney General conspicuously absent.

    cbc.bb


  31. The Deputy Dean at UWI, Cave Hill is currently exposing the amendment. A pity no government presence.

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