Court clears process

By ZEDAIAH KANAU
THE police are the only authority that can ask the court for a case to be withdrawn, not defence lawyers, a magistrate says.
Magistrate Tracy Ganaii told the defence lawyer of five men charged with causing grievous bodily harm that presenting any information relating to withdrawal of a case may seem that the defence was interfering with the complainants which would amount to a charge of perverting the course of justice.
The case of Jamie Pang, Patrick Druma, Smith Solomon, Clement Lusli and Douglas Moses was adjourned to Dec 10 for submissions after the police prosecutor in carriage of the case, Sgt Joseph Sangam, was away attending a workshop.
Only two defendants, Solomon and Lusli, turned up in court.
The defence was ready for submissions but told the court that the complainant had handed them a signed statutory declaration asking for the complaint to be withdrawn.
The defence then asked for a short adjournment because Sgt Sangam was not available and that he was the rightful person to have the statutory declaration.
Police prosecutor Sgt John Wamugl who stood in for Sgt Sangam had no objection to the adjournment.
After adjourning the case (Dec 10), Magistrate Ganaii said: “It is proper that this (state declaration) should be presented to court by the prosecutor.”
She told the lawyer that the decision to withdraw a case should not come from anybody else but the police so it was only proper that they did that.
“It may not seem right coming from the defence perspective, it may amount to perversion, it may amount to perverting the course of justice, it may indicate, interference with the complainant, she said.
“We’ve been saying that time and time again in this court. The decision to withdraw, it must come from the police.
The police must make their independent assessment by interviewing the complainant.”