Even as a sitting magistrate has not yet been arrested or charged for corruption, attorneys have come to the defence of the judicial officer.
The Express exclusively reported yesterday that the magistrate’s arrest is imminent on allegations that bribes were received for favourable court rulings.
The Express did not name the magistrate but attorney Prakash Ramadhar held a news conference at his San Fernando offices at which acting chief magistrate Brian Debideen was present.
‘WE WILL RESPOND’: Attorney Prakash Ramadhar greets acting Chief Magistrate Brian Debideen, right, at Ramadhar’s law chambers in San Fernando yesterday. —Photo: DEXTER PHILIP
Ramadhar referred to “pointed statements suggesting a magistrate had committed wrongdoing in the execution of his duties.”
“Today I have with me senior magistrate Mr Brian Debideen and my dear colleagues Mr Michael Rooplal and Mr Vishan Girwar. Three of us have been advising Mr Debideen because having regard to what is in that article we thought it fit and proper to set the record right. Although no names were put in the article there was in the public domain some time ago an issue connected to the very matters that were spoken of in the article,” Ramadhar said.
He added: “In this country, I have been practicing, next year will be 40 years, where I’ve seen vapour—sometimes called intelligence—converted into supposed ‘evidence’, where untruths are put forward as facts. I think it is necessary for us to take a very robust approach today having regard to all that has gone in the recent past and this Government’s effort to restore balance and sanity and decency and lawfulness in the exercise of our daily work. To undermine a judicial officer is a very serious thing, and it is my view, humbly, that the efforts to tarnish this most noble and hardworking of our judicial officers required a response, and that is why we are here today.”
Speaking at the news conference, Ramadhar said the magistrate had lived up to his oath, and had done nothing wrong. He, however, added that, “If any action is taken against him, we shall deal with that at that point in time….he will not go unattended.
“We will respond with all of our might to restore what is true and what is real…but we hope that the authorities and those who have power to make the decisions before errors are fallen into, will take a very robust approach in looking at what may be presented as potential facts.”
Ramadhar said that not every prosecution ends with a conviction, is wholesome, or for the right intention. He said that there many cases where false witnesses were put forward by the State, and those cases were continued by the State.
Referencing the Naraynsingh case as well as those of Dhanraj Singh and Sadiq Baksh, he said: “Not every allegation in Trinidad and Tobago is there merit attached to it. It is the courts that we resort to, to fight these things; but when you attack the court, that is where the gravest danger is.”
Matters on public record
Addressing the news conference, Rooplal referred to the cases the magistrate was said to have received bribes for in return for favourable rulings, saying they were between a year to 15 months old.
Pointing out that the matters were on public record, Rooplal outlined that in one of the matters, the person who was charged was a lawful Firearm User’s Licence (FUL) holder and “the charge that was before the court was an issue of excess ammunition being found in the possession of this elderly gentleman”.
Rooplal added that the matter came up before the magistrate sitting at the San Fernando Magistrates’ Court and the defendant entered a guilty plea. He said that, after mitigation by the defence attorney and the prosecutor recommending a non-custodial sentence, the man was placed on a bond.
“The law specifically provides for such a penalty to be imposed on an individual in those circumstances and the magistrate in his lawful exercise of discretion imposed a bond. There is nothing, as far as we can tell, untoward, certainly from our past practice as criminal defence lawyers, in that being done,” Rooplal said.
He further spoke of a WhatsApp message that was circulated after the March 2025 decision and while it had resurfaced, he said that it was already dealt with by the judiciary.
“What we can say is that the judiciary made it very clear that the content of what was circulating on social media was totally untrue. I would deem it malicious, and the judiciary issued a statement clarifying exactly what took place in court based on the actual recording,” Rooplal said.
Magistrate acted in accordance with the law
Rooplal also outlined the proceedings in the second matter which he said dealt with proceeds of crime detention—a cash detention order. Rooplal said that at the initial hearing, the magistrate ordered that the cash—a quantity of Trinidad and Tobago and United States currency—continue to be detained.
At the next hearing, evidence was presented and there was cross-examination. At the end of the hearing, it was conceded by the prosecution that there were no grounds to continue the detention of the local currency and the magistrate ordered its release. It was also ordered that the US currency continue to be held for a further three months and the matter was then dealt with by another magistrate, who ordered its return.
Rooplal said that the magistrate acted in accordance with the law and his duties and obligations, after submissions from the prosecution.
“You all would imagine social media has been ablaze with conspiracy theories about who is the magistrate, names have been calling, it’s gotten out of control—almost the way it’s spiralled out of control—and we just thought it was necessary to come here this afternoon for (the magistrate, through them,) to present his side of the story, because clearly we know he knows that the matters the allegations in the papers concerned were matters he has previously adjudicated on.”
