The High Court in Georgetown recently found that the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU) breached the fundamental right of Attorney-at-Law Tamieka Clarke, who was arrested by Police last year for advising her client to remain silent.
Chief Justice Roxane George delivered this ruling on June 12. In her decision, Justice George declared that Attorney Clarke’s “…fundamental right to personal liberty as guaranteed and protected by Article 139 of the Constitution of Guyana was breached… [by] officers of the Special Organised Crime Unit when the applicant (Clarke) was arrested and detained… for advising [her] client to remain silent when questioned by members of the Guyana Police Force.”
The incident, which sparked widespread condemnation and even protest action by the legal fraternity, occurred on October 28, 2022, at the SOCU Headquarters on Camp Road, Georgetown.
At the time, Attorney Clarke had accompanied her client, who was under investigation by SOCU, to the agency’s office where he was asked to sign a statement. However, the client told investigators that he was advised by his lawyer not to sign anything.
This resulted in one of the SOCU ranks accusing the attorney of preventing her client from giving a statement, and ordered that she be arrested for obstructing an officer in the conduct of his duties. The lawyer had revealed that her cell phone was taken away and she was prevented from leaving.
As such, Clarke remained detained at SOCU in silence until her lawyer, Nigel Hughes, got there.
Clarke, who previously served as a State Counsel in the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), was only released after the intervention of Attorney General Anil Nandlall, SC, who has offered her a profound apology for what he had described as an “unfortunate incident”.
Attorney Clarke subsequently filed a lawsuit against the State, naming the Attorney General as the respondent. She was seeking more than $300,000 in damages for, among other things, false imprisonment and violations of her constitutional rights.
While the substantial trial is yet to get underway, the Chief Justice delivered her ruling on a series of declarations that were sought.
In addition to finding that Clarke’s fundamental right was breached, Justice George also made four other declarations.
It was found that the detention and seizure of the attorney’s cellular phone by officers of SOCU without her permission and without lawful excuse was wrongful.
The High Court Judge also declared that an attorney-at-law, admitted to practice in Guyana, is entitled to advise a client to remain silent when questioned by any lawful enforcement agency.
Justice George also ruled that an attorney-at-law, to practice at the Bar in Guyana, is entitled to consult with his/her client in private without the contents of the consultation being recorded in any way including by means of audio-visual recording by any law enforcement agency in Guyana or elsewhere.
The Chief Justice also found that as a practicing attorney-at-law admitted to practice in Guyana, Attorney Clarke is entitled to advise any person who has sought her counsel to exercise the right to remain silent when questioned by a member of any law enforcement agency in Guyana.
The matter is set to be called again on September 19.
