The decision of the Privy Council’s Law Lords to order the liberation of suspect Dev Hurnam, provisionally charged after “revelations” by self-confessed criminal, Antoine Chetty, has given rise to what can safely be called a floodgate, at least on the defendants’ side. Chetty has incriminated nearly a dozen suspects, most of whom are under arrest and in custody, and they are now asking for bail, when such has been refused to them on previous occasions. The reason? If Dev Hurnam has been freed, then why can’t they?

Not to be outdone, prosecution has systematically resisted any such argument. Only three suspects have been successful so far - prosecution has decided that theirs were “exceptional cases” and has thus not objected. Mahendra Chooneea was freed last Friday after four months in detention , Dharmanaden Sambon was freed one day before and Sandeep Appadu was released on bail yesterday.

Moonsamy Mooraghen, on the other hand, was allowed bail “on the same conditions as Hurnam” by magistrate Dattatreya Panday - the suspect’s lawyer having managed to show the court that his charges were similar to that of barrister Dev Hurnam. Prosecution has however moved for a stay of execution and he has been remanded to the New Wing of Beau-Bassin central prison.

It is worth noting that magistrate Panday rejected prosecution’s arguments on the basis of his judicial oath. “I turn to my judicial oath which enjoins me to do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of Mauritius without fear or favour, affection or ill-will. So help me God.” The office of the DPP did not make much of the magistrate’s judicial oath though; a stay of execution followed.

Other avenues than Habeas Corpus

Notary Vinay Deelchand was also refused bail albeit on other grounds. His team of lawyers consisting of Guy Ollivry, Siddartha Hawoldar and Yanilla Moonshiram lodged a Habeas Corpus motion in the Supreme Court. Lawyers argued that Deelchand’s detention was in contravention of Section 5 of the Constitution that guarantees each citizen a trial within a reasonable time. The article goes further to say that, if such is not the case, then the person should be released either unconditionally or upon reasonable conditions.

Justice Paul Lam Shang Leen rejected the motion saying that counsels for applicant have not properly analysed the legal principles underlying a motion of Habeas corpus. Prior to this, the judge had rejected an analogy to the case of Dev Hurnam saying that such was not receivable since the Law Lords had not written their judgment yet. Justice Lam Shang Leen’s stand was the first-ever public reaction of a member of the judiciary to Hurnam’s liberation by the Privy Council. He also advised that there were other avenues open for a bail motion than through a Habeas Corpus, where it was not the judge’s duty to analyze the quality of the evidence against Deelchand.

His detention in the Bastille prison in Phoenix is causing him distress, according to his lawyers. Antoine Chetty was said to have yet more revelations to make but he has suspended his confessions because “he feels that somewhere, someone does not want him to talk.”