Proper process of warrant of arrest

The National Letters

I WISH to explain here based on my past experience as a former police detective of the Warrants of Arrest (WoA) process:
There are only two types of WoA issued by the courts to be enforced by the police and make a person appear before the courts.
They are:
(1) The first one is issued directly by the courts for persons who disobey court orders such as, absconding bail or failing to comply with a court direction or to compel a person to appear before the court to give evidence etc.
(2) Because there are certain types of offences provided by Law in the Criminal Code Act such as Official Corruption, a thorough investigation is conducted by police for such crimes. When the Investigation Officer (IO) finds that there is sufficient evidence to qualify for the arrest of a person, he/she submits an application to the district court.
We will concentrate only on the second process because this is where too much public controversy arising with regard to a standard police arrest procedure.
The WoA application procedure:
When an IO decides to arrest someone, he/she types the names and particulars of the offender (suspect to be arrested) on the WoA form (a prepared document) and ticks certain boxes on the warrant format.
This will be further supported by an affidavit and other evidence put together and will submit the application to the district court before a senior magistrate (only) for endorsement.
The magistrate will peruse and check to ensure that the charges are correct and the evidence is analysed with substantiated facts and is done properly in accordance with the laws.
This is similar to the Search Warrant process obtained by police to seize homes and properties and is moved by a way of an ex-parte process like in the Civil Courts
After the magistrate is satisfied with all its contents, he/she will endorse and issue the WoA to the IO making the application in order to apprehend the person named on the WoA.

  • Police after obtaining the WoA from the courts and for protocol reasons, the IO sometimes will write an invitation letter to the person whose name appears on the WoA to present himself or herself voluntarily at a police station for an interview. (This is normally done as a mark of respect for some of the persons whose name appears on the WoA are of high standing etc).
  • if the person fails to turn up voluntarily for the interview, then the IO has no option but will approach the person wherever he/she maybe and enforce the WoA to arrest and take the person to the police station to conduct a formal interview called a record of interview process.
  • during the interview, if the IO is satisfied beyond doubt that there is enough and credible evidence to lay formal charges, he/she may do so forthwith.
  • when the person is arrested through a WoA, there is NO BAIL granted and the person whose name appears on the WoA must be made to appear within the next 24 hours before a magistrate or Judge.
  • the court will then use its discretionary powers to decide whether to grant bail or not in the first mention day.
  • The substantive matter is then further adjourned for trial and a normal court trial process continues with the calling if witnesses to testify etc… subsequently the court gives out a verdict on the guilt and imprisonment or dismisses the case wherever applicable and the process comes to an end there.

Private law firms operate to make money and they will try every means and ways to satisfy their clients.
They peruse the WoA documents and will study its contents to look for little errors and of how it was compiled by the IO in the district court. When they find any minor issues like spelling errors etc… they quickly resort to apply for a stay orders, relying on the status of the person whose name appears on the WoA.
These are mere technical issues only and does not affect the core of the evidence of the charges pending to be laid by police.
The findings of minor spelling errors is perceived as a defective WoA but it does not mean that the entire case is defect and is the end of the arrest process but only the WoA is challenged and disputed and not the charges.
The arrest process is still active and incomplete as a result of that stay order and is just like putting the cart before the horse situation.
The evidence filed in the WoA application remains intact until the arrest is effected and the person is brought to appear immediately before the court and the hearing of the substantive matter continues.
If anyone tampers or falsifies any information on the WoA, they do that at their own risk and therefore are subject to an act of committing other criminal offences like forgery, fabricating of evidence, obstruction and hindering police duties.
A defective WoA does not mean that the case is defect.
No, the evidence filed on the WoA application remains intact until the person is arrested and made to appear immediately before the court and will be heard or tried during the hearing of the substantive matter.
Any person who obstructs or hinders police duties without reasonable excuses can be arrested and charged by police.
I hope this should shed some light to many people in this WoA process and execution.

Steven S. Palisa