Sullivan v Attorney-general & Anor (CP 13 of 2011) [2012] SCCC 5 (31 July 2012)

Sullivan v Attorney-general & Anor (CP 13 of 2011) [2012] SCCC 5 (31 July 2012)

Sections 184 to 191 of the Penal Code are formulated with sufficient precision, provide adequate defences, and constitute a prescribed law necessary in a democratic society for the protection of reputation. The arrest and criminal proceedings were lawful and within constitutional limits. There is no unconstitutionality in the impugned provisions or proceedings.

Citation
[2012] SCCC 5
Parties
Petitioner: Sullivan; Respondent: Attorney-General
Court
Constitutional Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
31 July 2012
Case Number
CP 13 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Outcome
petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Expression, Criminal Defamation, Constitutionality of Penal Provisions
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Freedom of Expression Criminal Defamation Constitutionality of Penal Provisions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sullivan

Petitioner

Attorney-General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arrest and detention of the petitioner was unconstitutional
  2. 2 Whether the criminal proceedings and charge in Criminal Side No 852 of 2010 are unconstitutional
  3. 3 Whether sections 184 to 191 of the Penal Code are unconstitutional and breach article 22 of the Constitution

Ratio Decidendi

Sections 184 to 191 of the Penal Code are formulated with sufficient precision, provide adequate defences, and constitute a prescribed law necessary in a democratic society for the protection of reputation. The arrest and criminal proceedings were lawful and within constitutional limits. There is no unconstitutionality in the impugned provisions or proceedings.

Court Disposition

petition dismissed