AN APPLICATION for a ruling into the controversial search and seizure of documents from two lawyer's offices last month has been put off until February 24 to allow Canadian national Robert Bidwell the 14 days required by law to respond to the claim form served on him on February 7. When the application came for hearing yesterday before Mrs. Justice Marva McIntosh in chambers at the Supreme Court, Bidwell was underrepresented.
Kent Pantry, Q.C., Director of Public Prosecutions is seeking a determination as to whether any breaches were committed when the police carried out searches at the offices of attorneys-at-law Ernest Smith and Hugh Thompson on January 27 and 28 and seized documents relating to Bidwell.
The lawyers were representing Bidwell in extradition proceedings at the time of the search. The police on the instructions of the DPP who is the Central Authority had obtained the search the warrants from the Corporate Area Resident Magistrate's to search the lawyers' offices. The search was to assist the Canadian government in its investigations into drug-related and money laundering offences against Bidwell.
Last week Bidwell waived his right to an extradition hearing and has decided to return to Canada to face the charges. He is in custody at the General Penitentiary.
The lawyers have complained that documents which did not belong to Bidwell were seized by the police.
Kent Pantry Q.C., Director of Public Prosecutions who brought the application had conceded on Monday that the notices served at the lawyers' offices and on Bidwell on Friday afternoon to attend court on Monday were short-served. Mr. Pantry pointed out that the matter was one of urgency.
Lawyers representing Ernest Smith and Hugh Thompson had agreed to waive the short service and return to court yesterday.
When the application came for hearing yesterday Bidwell who is in custody was not present or represented. The judge put off the application until February 24 so as to give Bidwell the 14 clear days in which to respond.
Mr. Pantry is asking the court to determine whether legal professional privilege attaches to any document that was seized and is seeking the following remedies and orders:
a) An order that the seized documents be examined by a Judge of the Supreme Court
b) A declaration as to whether legal professional privilege attaches to any document that has been seized or any part thereof.
c) An order that any privileged document or privileged portion of a document, that has been seized, be returned to the respondents
d) An order that, where no privilege attaches to any document that was seized, or portion thereof, certified copies of the documents or said portions be made available to the Canadian Central Authority and the original documents returned to the respondents.
The Jamaican Bar Association (JBA) has condemned the searches. On Wednesday the JBA was granted leave by the Supreme Court to apply to the Judicial Review Court for an order to quash the search warrants and to get declarations that the searches breached the confidentiality which exists between lawyers and their clients.
