The judicial review of Belmopan Magistrate Earl Jones to commit former Prime Minister Said Musa to trial for theft concluded this afternoon with Chief Justice Dr. Abdulai Conteh reserving his decision. For the last two and a half days, lead attorney for the former PM, Senior Counsel Edwin fFowers has argued that the case against his client is based on “false assumptions not supported by facts” and as such the Magistrate’s order should be quashed.
For her part, Jones’ representative in the case, Director of Public Prosecutions Cheryl Lynn Branker Taitt has insisted that Musa used the ten million dollars as if it were his own to settle the debt of Universal Health Services and a jury should be allowed to review the evidence in the case so they can determine Musa’s guilt or innocence of theft.
While the attorneys on both sides presented their submissions on five grounds, it appears tonight that the “weightiest” ground for Musa is whether the statement of Amalia Mai, which the CJ has described as the lynchpin of Jones’ decision, was done properly. Flowers has insisted that the strict procedure for taking of a deposition was not complied with. In response, the DPP has maintained that Mai was an unwilling but material witness and that to her mind, the relevant sections of the law were adhered to.
If the Mai statement is deemed inadmissible, it could very well result in the dismissal of the case. The Chief Justice also noted that the procedures for keeping an inventory of the statements was not adhered to by the Magistrate and he characterized that as a “grave” oversight. We asked the DPP for comments when she was leaving the courtroom, but she had none.
The CJ could either order that the committal order be quashed or simply require that a new preliminary inquiry be held.
