R v Agathine (CO 38/2005) [2007] SCSC 128 (21 June 2007)
The motion for referral to the Constitutional Court is dismissed because the alleged contravention of article 19(2)(e) is unsustainable; the legal incapacity of the witness arises from a deportation order, which must first be challenged in the Supreme Court, and there is no direct nexus between the deportation and the accused's constitutional rights in this forum.
- Citation
- [2007] SCSC 128
- Parties
- Prosecution: Republic; Accused: Agathine
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- Seychelles
- Judgment Date
- 21 June 2007
- Case Number
- CO 38/2005
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Ruling on Motion for Constitutional Referral
- Outcome
- motion dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Right to Fair Trial, Examination of Witnesses, Deportation, Judicial Review
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Republic
Prosecution
Agathine
Accused
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Ruling on Motion for Constitutional Referral
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused's right under article 19(2)(e) of the Constitution to call and examine witnesses is contravened by the deportation of his wife, a potential defence witness
- 2 Whether the issue warrants referral to the Constitutional Court under article 46(7)
Ratio Decidendi
The motion for referral to the Constitutional Court is dismissed because the alleged contravention of article 19(2)(e) is unsustainable; the legal incapacity of the witness arises from a deportation order, which must first be challenged in the Supreme Court, and there is no direct nexus between the deportation and the accused's constitutional rights in this forum.
Court Disposition
motion dismissed
Orders
- Motion dated 14 May 2007 is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment