Copyright newsday
The Court of Appeal has brought together several pending appeals challenging aspects of the Bail (Amendment) Act 2024, which changed the bail process for murder charges in Trinidad and Tobago. Under the amendment, persons charged with murder must now prove exceptional circumstances to be granted bail, as the presumption in favour of bail has been removed. The amendment aimed to restrict bail for those accused of serious offences. At a hearing on October 27, Justices of Appeal Gillian Lucky, Mira Dean-Armorer and Carla Brown-Antoine noted that the multiple appeals questioned the proper legal test for granting bail in murder cases under the amended act. Lucky said the appellate panels agreed to hear all related appeals together in early 2026 to ensure a consistent judicial approach. “This is an important issue,” Lucky said, noting that High Court judges have issued at least three differing interpretations. Attorneys for appellants will be given access to submissions from other cases and may file additional arguments by November 30. Lucky encouraged lawyers to review the Hansard record “down to the committee stage,” since one of the appeal questions was raised in Parliament by the then-opposition. She said the east and west appellate panels obtained the Chief Justice’s approval to merge the cases and that several law bodies – including the Public Defenders’ Department, the Law Association, the Criminal Bar Association and the Office of the Attorney General – will be invited to make submissions as interested parties. The Bail (Amendment) Act 2024 gave effect to the landmark Privy Council’s 2022 ruling in Akili Charles, which found that the previous blanket denial of bail for murder accused was unconstitutional. The amended law allowed a judge or master to grant bail if an accused could show exceptional circumstances justifying release. It also imposed a 120-day restriction on bail for certain serious and firearm-related offences and provided for a mandatory five-year review of its operation. Since the law took effect, courts have been asked to interpret section 5 of the act, particularly whether section 5 (5) permits bail applications after 180 days in custody or one year without trial without requiring proof of exceptional circumstances. Some applicants have argued that the section’s silence on that requirement indicates a legislative intent to ease the burden. In submissions at the High Court, the state has maintained that the amendment does not create an automatic right to bail but merely allows applications after a specified period, while still requiring proof of exceptional circumstances. Courts have generally held that section 5(2)(a) remains the operative standard, requiring a murder accused to demonstrate exceptional circumstances even after extended detention. “We want a consistent approach,” Lucky said. “What is the correct test to be applied…?” Also at Monday’s hearing, three appeals against conviction and sentences for varying offences were withdrawn. The judges affirmed the convictions and ordered that their sentences start from the dates of their convictions. A fourth appeal was also withdrawn.
