’WPC] ž®ƒqŠŌÆŲęŁzŸ6ć¬ķ£¾Uł'ٜóŽ8J&wcŁ–Y°üÄé{/\Gē-®œcś}óK;Ķ17Ž”Ėv2)§@vµi¶Č°µé– µŖĶžĒÖcFUKI’{¼WźQ±˜ Fkęˆ \I°‹hSŲ}(Ų_7,uv VŻfé n„™t{Ęģß«\Ćb­DøŖPx €Įj”\ó}oĘ9z-4’Ś™—ķ[“*ƒ~=·ß~øoi}Y…ŌbÜõTĄā(ŠLµÅŖų!!xī†Q"€Ŗn6ł4rͶ|ĖvB{äŠŃIåZ7Į:$gPlū³żjIM4@®¶bĢ mՏ uGü3ų½‘" ų¢cf…øž””Z: ŗ7³ ń ¹ŒŹhą÷č§ÆēTŁmĮ& %мõ³¦Ÿ]ę“éé‹E 8µö:cB„ńŁęóųŲtYŲøæž†Ig öƒRUėm)?ė*Ŗ€µ¼ĖæŖük³Ö’U>²Ģš 0µ¼ 0<q 0Y­ 0_ 0ie 0PĪ 0T Ęr 0į8 0( D+A AMl l l ¹ 0NÉ 0Ę #ĮŻ UNž %ģMņ(öN^ w,40D mFō\  `‹&Times New Roman' Earl Pratt and Ivan Morgan v. Jamaica, Communication No. 210/1986 and 225/1987 (6 April 194 225/1987 (6 April 19"Angie Dituri"0Angie Dituri .   6F , ’’4Heading 3Ō S ŌÓ p^SÓŌ€£££Ōņ ņŌ  ŌŌ  ŌŌ€XXXŌó óÓ p^SÓ<’’:Default Para6’’4HyperlinkóóņņŌ ’ ŌóóŌ  Ō<’’:FollowedHypeóóņņŌ  ŌóóŌ  Ō< ’’:Normal (Web)Ō S ŌÓ =jSÓÓ =jSÓ0’’.Strongņ ņŌ  Ōó óŌ  Ō4’’2EmphasisņņŌ  ŌóóŌ  ԁ Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(¹2=Š$££Ż ƒ&C!ŻŅܰŅŅܰŅŌ..ŌŌ  ŌŌ  ŌÓ  ÓŌ€XbŽXXXŌŌ€XbŽXXXbŽŌŌŌŻ  Ż(’’$’’'dxd A<< c’’#|x(ĶO$——Ō’ŌņņóóŌ’Ō(ž&C$””ŅܰŅŅܰŅŌ..ŌŌ  ŌŌ  ŌÓ  ÓŌ€XdFXXXŌŌ€XdFXXXdFŌŌԘHP LaserJet 6P/6MP - Standard,ä,,,,,ä0(ČhH  Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX¤ų* Äpģ*ź:i¢Ų+00 ’U‹’ĄĄĄŻ ƒ&C!ŻŅܰŅŅܰŅŌ..ŌŌ  ŌŌ  ŌÓ  ÓŌ€XbŽXXXŌŌ€XbŽXXXbŽŌŌŌŻ  ŻŌ_Ōņ ņHUMAN€RIGHTS€COMMITTEEŠ ° ŠĢņņPratt€and€Morgan€v.€JamaicaóóŠ |Ģ ŠĢCommunication€No.€210/1986€and€225/1987Š H˜ ŠĢ6€April€1989Š  d ŠĢĢVIEWSó óŠ Ę   ŠĢĢŻ‚’’’ŻŌSĖ xČ ŌÓ SÓŻ  ŻŻ‚’’’®ŻŻ  ŻņņņņSubmitted€by:óó€Earl€Pratt€and€Ivan€MorganŻƒ’’®ō݌Š Ė  ŠŒÓ SÓŻ  ŻĢņņAlleged€victims:óó€The€authorŠ ź:  ŠĢņņState€party€Concerned:óó€JamaicaŠ ¶ ŠĢņņDate€Of€Communications:óó€28€January€1986€and€12€March€1987Š ‚Ņ ŠĢņņDate€Of€decision€on€admissibility:óó€24€March€1988óóŠ Nž ŠĢĢņņÓ  ÓThe€Human€Rights€Committee,€óóestablished€under€article€28€of€the€International€CovenantŠ P Šon€Civil€and€Political€Rights:Š ę6 ŠĢņņMeeting€óóon€6€April€1989,Š ² ŠĢņņHaving€concluded€óóits€consideration€of€communications€Nos.€210/1986€and€225/1987,Š ~Ī Šsubmitted€to€the€Committee€by€Earl€Pratt€and€Ivan€Morgan€for€consideration€under€theŠ d“ ŠOptional€Protocol€to€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,Š J š ŠĢņņHaving€taken€into€account€óóall€written€information€made€available€to€it€by€the€authors€of€theŠ "f  Šcommunications€and€by€the€State€party,Š ü"L! ŠĢņņAdopts€óóthe€following:Š Č$ # ŠĢĢņņÓ  Óņ ņViews€under€article€5.€paragraph€4,€of€the€Optional€Protocoló óóóŠ z'Ź"& ŠÓÆÓĢĢ1.€The€authors€of€the€communications€dated€28€January€1986€and€12€March€1987€are€EarlŠ ,*|%) ŠPratt€and€Ivan€Morgan,€two€Jamaican€citizens€awaiting€execution€at€St.€Catherine€DistrictŠ +b&* ŠPrison,€Jamaica.€They€are€represented€Ż‚ ’’’ŻņņŌŌŻ  Żby€Ż‚ ’’’%ƒŻóóŌŌŻ  Żcounsel.€They€claim€to€be€victims€of€violations€Ż‚ ’’’ŻņņŌŌŻ  ŻbyŠ ų+H'+ Šthe€Ż‚ ’’’¼ƒŻóóŌŌŻ  ŻGovernment€of€Jamaica€of€articles€6,€7€e€14€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€andŠ Ž,.(, ŠPolitical€Rights.Š Ä-)- Ї2.1€On€6€October€1977,€Junior€Anthony€Ō_ŌMissickŌ_Ō€was€shot€to€death.€Three€men€wereŠ ° Šreportedly€involved€in€the€shooting,€including€the€authors,€both€of€whom€were€tri€in€theŠ –ę ŠHome€Circuit€Court€at€Kingston€from€10€to€15€January€1979.€It€is€alleged€that€an€importantŠ |Ģ ŠŌ_ŌdefenceŌ_Ō€witness,€Mr.€Clarence€Smith,€who€would€have€provided€are€alibi€for€Mr.€Pratt,€wasŠ b² Šavailable€to€give€testimony€when€the'€court€hearing€was€convened€on€Friday,€12€JanuaryŠ H˜ Š1979.€He€had,€however,€temporarily€left€the€premises,€and€when€he€returned,€the€Court€hadŠ . ~ Šadjourned€until€Monday,€15€January.€On€that€day€Mr.€Smith€was€not€present€and€the€judgeŠ  d Šclosed€the€case€without€hearing€his€testimony.€The€jury€found€the€authors€guilty€of€murderŠ ś J Šand€they€were€sentenced€to€death.Š ą 0 ŠĢ2.2€The€Jamaican€Court€of€Appeal€considered€the€authors'€appeal€in€September,€NovemberŠ ¬ ü  Šand€December€1980.€The€Ō_ŌdefenceŌ_Ō€argued€that€the€trial€judge€"wrongly€exercised€hisŠ ’ā  Šdiscretion€not€to€discharge€the€jury€upon€the€disclosure€of€prejudicial€evidence,€uponŠ xČ  Šextraneous€and€irrelevant€grounds,€and€upon€a€misinterpretation€of€the€evidence".€TheŠ ^®  Š"prejudicial€evidence"€challenged€in€the€appeal€was€the€allegedly€fortuitous€statement€by€theŠ D”  Šchief€witness€for€the€prosecution€that€Mr.€Pratt€and€Mr.€Morgan€had€been€friends€of€theŠ *z  Šdeceased€for€about€three€years,€and€that€Mr.€Pratt€and€the€deceased€had€previously€shotŠ ` Šanother€friend€of€theirs.€This€statement€did€not€specify€who€had€been€shot€or€what€theŠ öF Šconsequences€of€the€shooting€had€been,€but€left€an€impression€with€the€jury€that€the€accusedŠ Ü, Šwere€capable€of€killing€their€own€friends.€It€is€argued€that€the€jury€would€have€beenŠ Ā Šdischarged€and€a€new€trial€ordered,€as€requested€by€the€Ō_ŌdefenceŌ_Ō.€In€rejecting€the€appeal,€theŠ Øų ŠCourt€of€Appeal€found€that€the€directions€of€the€trial€judge€had€not€operated€to€the€detrimentŠ ŽŽ Šof€the€appellants.€In€the€particular€case€of€Mr.€Morgan,€the€trial€record€shows€that€the€onlyŠ tÄ Ševidence€against€him€was€the€statement€of€one€witness€that€he€had€been€with€Mr.€Pratt€at€theŠ ZŖ Štime€of€the€looting€and€that€he€too€had€Ō_ŌhadŌ_Ō€a€gun.€The€witness€had€not€seen€him€actuallyŠ @ Šshoot,€nor€was€there€any€evidence€produced€to€show€that€the€killing€had€been€in€pursuanceŠ &v Što€a€prior€agreement.€In€his€Ō_ŌdefenceŌ_Ō,€Mr.€Morgan€himself€had€stated,€by€way€of€alibi,€that€heŠ  \ Šhad€been€with€his€wife€and€children€at€the€time€of€the€killing.Š ņB ŠĢ2.3€The€Court€of€Appeal€did€not€state€its€reasons€for€rejecting€the€appeal€until€early€fourŠ ¾ Šyears€later,€on€24€September€1984.€A€petition€for€special€leave€to€appeal€to€the€JudicialŠ ¤ō ŠCommittee€of€the€Privy€Council€was€dismissed€on€7€July€1986.€The€Judicial€CommitteeŠ Š Ś Šnevertheless€expressed€the€view€that€it€was€disgraceful€that€some€nine€years€had€elapsedŠ p!Ą  Šsince€the€alleged€offence€and€seven€years€since€conviction€before€the€matter€came€before€it.Š V"¦! ŠIn€particular,€the€judicial€Committee€thought€that€the€delay€by€the€Court€of€Appeal€ofŠ <#Œ" ŠJamaica€in€issuing€a€written€judgement,€almost€four€years€from€the€date€of€the€hearing,€wasŠ "$r# Šinexcusable€and€must€never€occur€again,€especially€not€in€a€capital€penalty€case.€he€JudicialŠ %X $ ŠCommittee€of€the€Privy€Council€expressed€grave€misgivings€about€this€delay€and€pointed€outŠ ī%>!% Šthat€this€could€be€the€source€of€grave€injustice€and€possibly€constitute€inhuman€andŠ Ō&$"& Šdegrading€treatment.€It€is€claimed€on€behalf€of€the€authors€that€such€"inexcusable€delay"Š ŗ' #' Šconstituted€cruel€and€inhuman€treatment€in€hat,€between€1980€and€1984,€they€could€notŠ  (š#( Špursue€their€petition€for€special€leave€to€appeal€to€the€Privy€Council€because€such€aŠ †)Ö$) Šprocedure€was€not€possible€without€he€written€judgement€of€the€Jamaican€Court€of€Appeal.Š l*¼%* ŠMoreover,€during€all€this€period€they€were€detained€in€that€part€of€the€prison€reserved€forŠ R+¢&+ Šconvicted€persons€waiting€execution.Š 8,ˆ', ŠŠ -n(- ŠŌ_Ō2.4€On€13€February€1987,€a€warrant€was€issued€for€the€execution€of€Mr.€Pratt€and€Jr.€MorganŠ ° Što€take€place€on€24€February€1987.€A€stay€of€execution€was€granted€for€both€men€on€23Š –ę ŠFebruary€1987.€They€were€notified€of€the€stay€only€45€minutes€before€the€executions€wereŠ |Ģ Što€take€place.Š b² ŠĢ3.€In€the€case€of€Mr.€Pratt,€the€Human€Rights€Committee€had,€by€interim€decision€dated€21Š . ~ ŠJuly€1986,€ņņinter€alia,€óórequested€the€State€party,€under€rules€86€and€91€of€:he€Committee'sŠ  d Šrules€of€procedure,€not€to€carry€out€the€death€sentence€against€the€author€before€theŠ ś J ŠCommittee€had€had€an€opportunity€to€consider€further€the€question€of€the€admissibility€ofŠ ą 0 Šthe€communication€and€to€provide€the€Committee€with€several€clarifications€concerning€theŠ Ę   Šjudicial€remedies€available€to€the€author.€By€submission€dated€18€November€1986,€the€StateŠ ¬ ü  Šparty€provided€the€clarifications€bought€by€the€Committee.Š ’ā  ŠĢ4.€Under€cover€of€a€letter€dated€20€March€1987,€the€authors'€representative€submitted€furtherŠ ^®  Šinformation.€In€particular,€he€argues:€(a)€that€the€delays€in€:he€judicial€proceedings€againstŠ D”  Šthe€authors€constitute€a€violation€of€the€right€to€be€heard€within€a€reasonable€time;€(b)€thatŠ *z  Šthe€authors€have€been€subjected€to€cruel,€inhuman€and€degrading€treatment€by€reason€of€suchŠ ` Šdelay€and€also€by€reason€of€having€been€confined€to€death€row€since€their€conviction€andŠ öF Šsentence€in€January€1979;€(c)€that€service€of€a€warrant€for€their€execution€would€amount€toŠ Ü, Šan€arbitrary€deprivation€of€life;€and€(d)€that€the€Court€of€Appeal's€failure€to€provide€a€writtenŠ Ā Šjudgement€within€a€reasonable€time€constitutes€a€breach€of€section€20€of€the€Constitution€ofŠ Øų ŠJamaica€and€is€contrary€to€the€Court€of€Appeal'€duty€to€give€reasons€for€an€importantŠ ŽŽ Šdecision€and,€accordingly,€contrary€to€principles€of€natural€justice.Š tÄ ŠĢ5.€By€decision€dated€24€March€1987€concerning€the€communication€of€Mr.€Morgan,€theŠ @ ŠHuman€Rights€Committee€transmitted€the€communication€to€the€State€party,€requesting€it,Š &v Šunder€rule€91€of€the€provisional€rules€of€procedure,€to€provide€information€and€observationsŠ  \ Šrelevant€to€the€question€of€the€admissibility€of€the€communication€and,€under€rule€86€of€theŠ ņB Šrules€of€procedure,€not€to€carry€out€the€death€sentence€against€Mr.€Morgan€before€theŠ Ų( ŠCommittee€had€had€the€opportunity€to€render€a€final€decision€in€the€case.€By€further€decisionŠ ¾ Šunder€rule€91€dated€8€April€1987,€concerning€the€communication€of€Mr.€Pratt,€theŠ ¤ō ŠCommittee€decided€to€transmit€the€additional€information€to€the€State€party€and€to€requestŠ Š Ś Šit€to€clarify:€(a)€how€long€it€would€normally€take€the€Court€of€Appeal€to€produce€a€writtenŠ p!Ą  Šjudgement€in€appeals€against€convictions€for€a€capital€offence;€and€(b)€When€the€Court€ofŠ V"¦! ŠAppeal€did€not€provide€a€written€judgement€until€three€years€and€nine€months€after€rejectingŠ <#Œ" Šthe€author's€appeal.€As€in€the€case€of€Mr.€Morgan,€it€requested€the€State€party,€under€rule€86Š "$r# Šof€the€provisional€rules€of€procedure,€not€to€carry€out€the€death€sentence€against€the€authorŠ %X $ Šuntil€it€had€had€an€opportunity€to€render€a€final€decision€in€the€case.Š ī%>!% ŠĢ6.1€In€two€submissions€under€rule€91€dated€4€and€10€June€1987,€jointly€relatingŠ ŗ' #' Šcommunications€210/1986€and€225/1987,€the€State€party€replied€to€the€questions€posed€byŠ  (š#( Šthe€Committee€in€its€decision€of€8€April€1987,€referred€to€in€paragraph€above,€and€objectedŠ †)Ö$) Što€the€admissibility€of€the€communications€on€a€number€of€grounds.Š l*¼%* ŠĢ6.2€With€regard€to€the€first€question€posed€by€the€Committee,€it€explained€that€Š 8,ˆ', ŠŠ -n(- Š"It€is€established€practice€of€the€Court€of€Appeal€to€endeavour€to€hand€down€judgements€inŠ ° Šcriminal€cases€in€the€term€in€which€the€appeal€is€heard,€or€a€the€very€latest,€during€the€nextŠ –ę Šterm.€This€means€that€judgements€or€reason€for€judgements€are€normally€available€withinŠ |Ģ Šthree€months€of€the€hearing€of€the€appeal."Š b² ŠĢWith€regard€to€the€second€question,€it€stated€that:Š . ~ ŠĢ"[O]n€November€12,€1980,€the€application€for€leave€to€appeal€by€Earl€Pratt€Ivan€MorganŠ ś J Šcame€up€for€hearing€before€the€Court€of€Appeal.€The€application€was€refused€and€the€CourtŠ ą 0 Špromised€to€give€written€reasons€at€a€later€date.€Regrettably,€owing€to€an€oversight,€theŠ Ę   Špapers€in€the€case€were€co„mingled€with€completed€case€files.€It€was€not€until€the€summerŠ ¬ ü  Šof€1984€that€it€was€brought€to€the€attention€of€the€judge€who€was€to€prepare€the€writtenŠ ’ā  Šjudgement€that€the€reasons€for€judgement€were€outstanding,€and€he€then€attended€to€theŠ xČ  Šmatter."Š ^®  ŠĢ6.3€The€State€party€rejects€to€the€authors'€contention€that€the€delays€in€the€judicialŠ *z  Šproceedings€in€their€cases€constitute€a€violation€of€the€right€to€be€heard€within€a€reasonableŠ ` Štime.€It€argues€that,€during€the€three€years€and€nine€months€between€the€Court€of€Appeal'sŠ öF Šjudgement€and€the€delivery€of€its€written€decision,€it€would€have€been€open€to€the€authorsŠ Ü, Šor€to€their€counsel€to€apply€to€the€Court€of€Appeal€for€the€written€judgement;€had€they€doneŠ Ā Šso,€the€Court€would€have€been€obliged€to€provide€it.€According€to€the€State€party,€theŠ Øų Šresponsibility€of€the€accused€for€asserting€his€rights€is€an€important€factor€in€considering€anŠ ŽŽ Šallegation€of€breach€of€the€right€to€trial€within€a€reasonable€time.€Since€the€authors€are€saidŠ tÄ Šnot€to€have€asserted€their€rights,€the€State€party€contends€that€article€14,€paragraph€3€(d),€ofŠ ZŖ Šthe€Covenant,€which€it€sees€as€being€coterminous€with€section€20,€paragraph€1,€of€theŠ @ ŠJamaican€Constitution,€has€not€been€violated.€The€State€party€further€denies€that€delays€inŠ &v Šthe€judicial€proceedings€concerning€the€authors€constitute€cruel,€inhuman€or€degradingŠ  \ Špunishment€in€violation€of€article€7€of€the€Covenant,€or€that€service€of€a€warrant€for€theŠ ņB Šexecution€of€the€authors€would€amount€to€an€arbitrary€deprivation€of€life.Š Ų( ŠĢ6.4€The€State€party€further€contends€that€the€authors'€communications€are€inadmissibleŠ ¤ō Šbecause€they€have€failed€to€exhaust€domestic€remedies,€as€required€by€article€5,€paragraphŠ Š Ś Š2€(b),€of€the€Optional€Protocol.€It€points€out€that€in€respect€of€the€authors'€complaints€„Š p!Ą  Šbreach€of€the€right€to€trial€without€undue€delay€and€breach€of€the€right€to€protection€againstŠ V"¦! Šsubjection€to€torture€or€cruel,€inhuman€or€degrading€treatment€„€it€would€have€been€open€toŠ <#Œ" Šthe€authors€to€apply€to€the€Supreme€Court€for€redress€alleging€breaches€of€these€fundamentalŠ "$r# Šrights€protected€by€sections€17€and€20,€paragraph€1,€of€the€Jamaican€Constitution.Š %X $ ŠĢ7.1€In€their€comments€dated€29€October€1987,€the€authors€contend€that€their€allegations€areŠ Ō&$"& Šwell„founded,€and€that€they€have€indeed€exhausted€all€available€legal€remedies.€They€referŠ ŗ' #' Što€the€decision€of€the€Judicial€Committee€of€the€Privy€Council€in€ņņNoel€Riley€et€al,€v.€theŠ  (š#( ŠAttorney„General€óó(1981),€where€it€was€decided€by€a€majority€(3/2)€that€whatever€the€reasonsŠ †)Ö$) Šfor,€or€length€of,€delay€in€executing€a€sentence€of€death€lawfully€imposed,€the€delay€canŠ l*¼%* Šafford€no€ground€for€holding€the€execution€to€be€in€contravention€of€section€17€of€theŠ R+¢&+ ŠJamaican€Constitution.€Accordingly€there€are€no€grounds€upon€which€an€application€by€wayŠ 8,ˆ', Šof€constitutional€motion€to€.the€Supreme€Court€of€Jamaica€could€successfully€be€brought.Š -n(- ŠAny€such€motion€must€inevitably€fail€and€be€decided€against€the€applicants:€in€consequence,Š ° Šthis€is€not€a€domestic€remedy€available€to€the€applicants.€On€17€July€1986,€the€JudicialŠ –ę ŠCommittee€of€the€Privy€Council€refused€the€applicants'€petition€for€special€leave€to€appeal.Š |Ģ ŠĢ7.2€In€a€further€submission€under€rule€91€dated€17€February€1988,€the€authors€provideŠ H˜ Šadditional€information€concerning€the€alleged€violation€of€article€14€of€the€Covenant€to€theŠ . ~ Šeffect€that€they€were€not€given€a€fair€trial€and€were€denied€the€opportunity€to€establish€theirŠ  d Šinnocence.€They€claim€that€during€the€trial€the€principal€prosecution€witness€was€questionedŠ ś J Šby€the€judge,€to€whom€he€answered€that€Mr.€Pratt€had€shot€a€person€other€than€the€victim;Š ą 0 Šthereafter€the€judge€not€only€asked€the€shorthand€writer€to€repeat€this€prejudicial€evidenceŠ Ę   Šbut€proceeded€to€hear€the€submissions€of€the€lawyer€on€this€evidence€in€the€presence€of€theŠ ¬ ü  Šjury.€Thus€it€was€impossible€for€the€jury€to€ignore€the€above„mentioned€prejudicial€evidenceŠ ’ā  Šagainst€Mr.€Pratt€and,€by€association,€Mr.€Morgan.€Furthermore,€since€the€lawyer€made€hisŠ xČ  Šsubmissions€in€the€presence€of€the€jury€immediately€after€the€questioning€of€the€witness€byŠ ^®  Šthe€judge,€this€highlighted€the€prejudicial€nature€of€this€piece€of€evidence€in€the€eyes€of€theŠ D”  Šjury.€It€is€argued€that€the€extent€of€the€prejudice€was€such€that€the€judge€could€not€redressŠ *z  Šthe€balance€in€his€summing€up;€in€any€event,€he€declined€to€do€so.€The€authors€consider€thisŠ ` Što€be€bias€on€the€part€of€the€judge€against€them.€According€to€the€authors,€another€exampleŠ öF Šof€the€judge's€bias€was€his€refusal€to€confirm€to€the€jury€that€they€were€of€previous€goodŠ Ü, Šcharacter.€They€submit€that€this€.evidence€should€have€been€accepted.€Finally€they€argue€thatŠ Ā Šthey€were€poorly€defended.€In€particular,€they€claim€that€it€was€wrong€for€Mr.€Pratt'sŠ Øų Šcounsel,€while€waiting€for€the€arrival€of€a€vital€alibi€witness€who€would€testify€that€Mr.€PrattŠ ŽŽ Šwas€elsewhere€at€the€time€of€the€murder,€to€decide€to€close€the€case€at€this€point€and€to€soŠ tÄ Šinform€the€Court.€This€is€said€to€be€buttressed€by€a€statement€of€the€Court€of€Appeal€which,Š ZŖ Šin€refusing€an€application€to€call€new€alibi€evidence,€criticized€Mr.€Pratt's€counsel€as€follows:Š @ Š"...€it€is€clear€that€this€was€not€a€case€of€the€witness€not€being€available€...€Indeed,€we€formedŠ &v Šthe€view€that€counsel€at€the€trial€had€chosen€to€close€his€case€and€to€take€a€calculated€chance"Š  \ ŠĢ7.3€For€the€above€reasons,€the€authors€claim€that€they€were€effectively€denied€theŠ Ų( Šopportunity€to€have€their€innocence€established.€They€refer€in€this€context€to€resolutionŠ ¾ Š1984/50€on€"Safeguards€guaranteeing€protection€of€the€rights€of€those€facing€the€deathŠ ¤ō Špenalty",€adopted€by€the€Economic€and€Social€Council€on€25€May€1984,€and€in€particularŠ Š Ś Šsafeguard€No.€5:Š p!Ą  ŠĢ"Capital€punishment€may€only€be€carried€out€pursuant€to€a€final€judgement€rendered€by€aŠ <#Œ" Šcompetent€court€after€legal€process€which€gives€all€possible€safeguards€to€ensure€a€fair€trial,Š "$r# Šat€least€equal€to€those€contained€in€article€14€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€andŠ %X $ ŠPolitical€Rights,€including€the€right€of€anyone€suspected€of€or€charged€with€a€crime€forŠ ī%>!% Šwhich€capital€punishment€may€be€imposed€to€adequate€legal€assistance€at€all€stages€of€theŠ Ō&$"& Šproceedings."Š ŗ' #' ŠĢ8.€On€23€February€1988,€a€second€warrant€was€issued€for€the€execution€of€the€authors€on€8Š †)Ö$) ŠMarch€1988.€By€telegram€dated€24€February€1988€addressed€to€the€Jamaican€Deputy€PrimeŠ l*¼%* ŠMinister€and€Minister€for€Foreign€Affairs,€the€Chairman€of€the€Human€Rights€CommitteeŠ R+¢&+ Šreiterated€the€Committee's€request€for€a€stay€of€execution€in€conformity€with€its€decisionsŠ 8,ˆ', Šof€24€March€and€8€April€1987.€A€second€stay€of€execution€was€granted€for€both€men€on€1Š -n(- ŠMarch€1988.Š ° ŠĢ9.1€Before€considering€any€claims€in€a€communication,€the€Human€Rights€Committee€must,Š |Ģ Šin€accordance€with€rule€87€of€its€provisional€rules€of€procedure,€decide€whether€or€not€it€isŠ b² Šadmissible€under€the€Optional€Protocol€to€the€Covenant.Š H˜ ŠĢ9.2€Having€considered€that€communications€No.€210/1986€and€No.€225/1987€refer€to€theŠ  d Šsame€events€said€to€have€taken€place€in€Jamaica€since€October€1977€and€can€thu:Š ś J Šappropriately€be€dealt€with€together,€the€Committee€decided€on€24€March€1988€to€dealŠ ą 0 Šjointly€with€these€communications,€pursuant€to€rule€88,€paragraph€2,€of€its€provisional€rulesŠ Ę   Šof€procedure.Š ¬ ü  ŠĢ9.3€The€Committee€has€ascertained,€as€it€is€required€to€do€under€article€5,€paragraph€2€(a),Š xČ  Šof€the€Optional€Protocol,€that,€although€the€authors'€cases€were€considered€by€the€Inter„Š ^®  ŠAmerican€Commission€on€Human€Rights,€they€are€no€longer€being€examined€under€anotherŠ D”  Šprocedure€of€international€investigation€or€settlementŠ *z  ŠĢ9.4€With€regard€to€the€State€party's€contention€that€the€authors€had€failed€to€exhaust€domesticŠ öF Šremedies€because€they€would€still€be€able€to€submit€their€case€to€the€Supreme€Court€ofŠ Ü, ŠJamaica,€the€Committee€noted€that€the€allegations€relating€to€violations€of€articles€14€and€7Š Ā Šof€the€Covenant€were€inextricably€mixed€and€that,€in€so€far€as€article€14€was€concerned,Š Øų Šavailable€remedies€had€been€exhausted.€Accordingly,€the€Committee€was€unable€to€find€thatŠ ŽŽ Šthe€authors€had€failed€to€comply€with€the€requirements€of€article€5,€paragraph€2€(b),€of€theŠ tÄ ŠOptional€Protocol.Š ZŖ ŠĢ10.€On€24€March€1988,€the€Human€Rights€Committee€therefore€decided€that€theŠ &v Šcommunications€were€admissible.Š  \ ŠĢ11.1€In€its€submission€under€article€4,€paragraph€2,€of€the€Optional€Protocol,€dated€19€AugustŠ Ų( Š1988,€the€State€party€notes€that€inasmuch€as€the€authors'€allegation€concerning€a€violationŠ ¾ Šof€article€6€is€concerned,€the€Committee's€decision€on€admissibility€suggests€that€this€claimŠ ¤ō Šis€no€longer€under€consideration€y€it.€With€respect€to€the€alleged€violations€of€articles€7€andŠ Š Ś Š14,€it€reiterates€is€arguments€outlined€in€paragraph€6.4€above€and€comments€on€the€authors'Š p!Ą  Šcontentions€in€paragraph€7.1€above.€Concerning€the€argument€that€any€constitutional€motionŠ V"¦! Šin€their€case€would€inevitably€fail€because€of€the€precedent€et€by€the€Privy€Council's€decisionŠ <#Œ" Šin€ņņRiley€v.€the€Attorney„General,€óóit€points€out€hat€the€requirement€of€exhaustion€of€domesticŠ "$r# Šremedies€was€adopted€by€consensus€by€he€States€parties€to€the€Optional€Protocol,€and€thatŠ %X $ Šin€the€circumstances€of€the€case,€the€requirement€cannot€be€deemed€to€have€been€met€orŠ ī%>!% Šwaived€for€the€reasons€advanced€by€the€authors.€The€only€qualification,€in€article€5,Š Ō&$"& Šparagraph€2€(b),€ņņin€fine,€óóthat€the€general€rule€shall€not€apply€"where€the€application€of€theŠ ŗ' #' Šremedies€is€unreasonably€prolonged",€is€said€to€be€inapplicable€to€the€case.Š  (š#( ŠĢ11.2€The€State€party€rejects€the€argument€that€"an€application€to€the€Supreme€Court,€inŠ l*¼%* Šrespect€of€section€17€of€the€Jamaican€Constitution,€must€inevitably€fail€y€reason€of€the€PrivyŠ R+¢&+ ŠCouncil's€decision€in€Riley's€case".€It€contends€that€while€t€is€true€that€the€doctrine€ofŠ 8,ˆ', Šprecedent€is€generally€applicable,€it€is€equally€rue€that€this€doctrine€may€be€set€aside€on€theŠ -n(- Šgrounds€that€a€previous€decision€ad€been€arrived€at€ņņper€incuriam€óó(through€inadvertence).Š ° ŠThus,€it€would€be€open€to€he€authors€to€argue€that€the€decision€in€ņņRiley€v,€the€Attorney„Š –ę ŠGeneral€óówas€the€result€of€inadvertence,€especially€in€the€light€of€the€dissenting€opinionsŠ |Ģ Šgiven€by€ord€Scarman€and€Lord€Brightman.€For€this€reason,€the€State€party€contends€thatŠ b² Šhere€are€no€grounds€for€disregarding€its€contention€that€the€communications€are€inadmissibleŠ H˜ Šin€so€far€as€they€relate€to€article€7.Š . ~ ŠĢ11.3€With€respect€to€the€alleged€violation€of€article€14,€the€State€party€refers€to€curiousŠ ś J Šaspects"€in€the€way€in€which€the€Committee's€decision€on€admissibility€addresses€this€issueŠ ą 0 Šand€its€earlier€submission€that€the€communications€are€inadmissible€because€of€non„Š Ę   Šexhaustion€of€domestic€remedies€because€the€authors€did€not€avail€themselves€of€theŠ ¬ ü  Šremedies€provided€for€in€section€25€of€the€Jamaican€Constitution.€It€submits€that€since€theŠ ’ā  Šauthors€had€not€complained€about€the€non„availability€of€remedies€in€this€respect,€one€shouldŠ xČ  Šhave€expected€the€Committee€to€declare€the€communication€inadmissible€for€non„exhaustionŠ ^®  Šof€domestic€remedies.€It€describes€the€Committee's€argumentation€as€"unreasoned"€andŠ D”  Šaffirms€.hat€the€Committee's€conclusion€that€domestic€remedies€had€been€exhausted€inŠ *z  Š'elation€to€article€14€rests€on€the€simple€assertion€that€"the€allegations€relating€.o€violationsŠ ` Šof€articles€14€and€7€of€the€Covenant€are€inextricably€mixed€and€that,€n€so€far€as€article€14€isŠ öF Šconcerned,€available€remedies€have€been€exhausted".Š Ü, ŠĢ11.4€According€to€the€State€party,€the€latter€argument€is:Š Øų ŠĢ"unreasonable€and€unreasoned€because,€firstly,€the€[Committee's]€decision€does€not€identifyŠ tÄ Šthe€basis€for€the€supposed€principle€that€if€the€allegations€relating€to€articles€14€and€7€areŠ ZŖ Šinextricably€mixed,€local€remedies€have€for€that€reason€been€exhausted;€secondly,€assumingŠ @ Šthe€validity€of€any€such€principle€(which€the€State€party€does€not€believe€to€exist),€theŠ &v Šdecision€proceeds€by€way€of€assertion€rather€than€reason€in€that€it€does€not€offer€any€reasonŠ  \ Šfor,€or€illustration€of,€the€'inextricable€mixture';€in€short,€it€does€not€show€how€the€differentŠ ņB Šallegations€relating€to€these€separate€articles€are€'inextricably€mixed'."Š Ų( ŠĢ11.5€The€State€party€thus€concludes€that€the€Committee's€decision€on€admissibility€isŠ ¤ō Š"unwarranted€and€without€foundation"€and€reiterates€that€it€considers€the€allegations€relatingŠ Š Ś Što€a€violation€of€article€14€to€be€inadmissible€for€non„exhaustion€of€domestic€remedies.Š p!Ą  ŠĢ12.1€The€Human€Rights€Committee€has€considered€the€present€communications€in€the€lightŠ <#Œ" Šof€all€the€information€made€available€to€it€by€the€parties,€as€provided€in€article€5,€paragraphŠ "$r# Š1,€of€the€0ptional€Protocol.Š %X $ ŠĢ12.2€The€Committee€has€taken€note€of€the€State€party's€contention€that€with€respect€to€theŠ Ō&$"& Šalleged€violations€of€articles€7€and€14,€domestic€remedies€have€not€been€exhausted€by€theŠ ŗ' #' Šauthors.€It€takes€the€opportunity€to€expand€upon€its€admissibility€findings.Š  (š#( ŠĢ12.3€The€State€party€has€contended€that€the€Committee€has€no€discretion€in€the€applicationŠ l*¼%* Šof€the€local€remedies€rule€(save€that€the€remedy€is€unacceptably€prolonged),€in€the€sense€thatŠ R+¢&+ Šwhere€local€remedies€are€not€exhausted€it€must€declare€a€communication€inadmissible.€ThisŠ 8,ˆ', Šis€correct€in€principle,€but€the€Committee€necessarily€has€to€determine€whether€there€areŠ -n(- Šeffective€local€remedies€left€for€an€author€to€exhaust.€That€the€local€remedies€rule€does€notŠ ° Šrequire€resort€to€appeals€that€objectively€have€no€prospect€of€success,€is€a€well€establishedŠ –ę Šprinciple€of€international€law€and€of€the€Committee's€jurisprudence.Š |Ģ ŠĢ12.4€The€Committee€has€taken€due€notice€of€the€State€party's€argument€that€a€constitutionalŠ H˜ Šmotion€filed€on€behalf€of€the€authors€in€the€Supreme€Court€of€Jamaica€is€not€bound€to€failŠ . ~ Šsimply€because€of€the€precedent€set€by€the€judgement€of€the€Judicial€Committee€of€the€PrivyŠ  d ŠCouncil€in€the€case€of€ņņRiley€v.€the€Attorney„General,€óóand€that€the€authors€could€have€arguedŠ ś J Šthat€the€said€judgement€had€been€arrived€at€ņņper€incuriam.óóŠ ą 0 ŠĢ12.5€A€thorough€consideration€of€the€judgement€of€the€Privy€Council€in€the€case€of€RileyŠ ¬ ü  Šdoes€not€lend€itself€to€the€conclusion€that€it€was€arrived€at€ņņper€incuriamóó€.€This€judgementŠ ’ā  Šexplicitly€endorses€the€conclusion€of€the€Privy€Council€in€another€case€concerning€chapterŠ xČ  Šthree€of€the€Jamaican€Constitution,€a/€where€it€had€been€argued€that€this€chapter€proceededŠ ^®  Šon€the€assumption€that€"the€fundamental€rights€which€it€covers€are€already€secured€to€theŠ D”  Špeople€of€Jamaica€by€existing€law",€and€that€"the€laws€in€force€are€not€to€be€subjected€toŠ *z  Šscrutiny€in€order€to€see€whether€or€not€they€conform€to€the€precise€terms"€of€the€provisionsŠ ` Šin€chapter€three.€And€while€it€is€true€that€Lord€Scarman€and€Lord€Brightman€dissented€fromŠ öF Šthe€majority€opinion,€they€did€acknowledge€that€the€constitutional€remedy€was€only€availableŠ Ü, Šwhere€there€was€no€other€adequate€redress.€In€these€circumstances,€authors'€counsel€wasŠ Ā Šobjectively€entitled€to€take€the€view€that,€on€the€basis€of€the€doctrine€of€precedent,€aŠ Øų Šconstitutional€motion€in€the€cases€of€Mr.€Pratt€and€Mr.€Morgan€would€be€bound€to€fail€andŠ ŽŽ Šthat€there€thus€was€no€effective€local€remed€still€to€exhaust.Š tÄ ŠĢ12.6€Section€20,€paragraph€1,€of€the€Jamaican€Constitution€guarantees€the€right€to€a€fair€trial,Š @ Šand€section€25€provides€for€the€implementation€of€the€provisions€guaranteeing€the€rights€ofŠ &v Šthe€individual.€Section€25,€paragraph€2,€stipulates€hat€the€Supreme€Court€has€jurisdiction€toŠ  \ Š"hear€and€determine€applications"€but€odds,€ņņin€fine,€óóthe€following€qualifications:Š ņB ŠĢ"Provided€that€the€Supreme€Court€shall€Ż‚ ’’’ŻņņŌŌŻ  Żnot€Ż‚ ’’’aznt€aŻóóŌŌŻ  Żexercise€its€powers€under€this€subsection€if€it€isŠ ¾ Šsatisfied€that€adequate€means€of€redress€for€the€contravention€alleged€are€or€have€beenŠ ¤ō Šavailable€to€the€person€concerned€under€any€other€law."Š Š Ś ŠĢIn€the€view€of€the€Committee€the€authors€had€means€of€redress€available€for€the€allegedŠ V"¦! Šbreach€of€their€right€to€a€fair€trial€by€appealing€to€the€Jamaican€Court€of€Appeal€and€byŠ <#Œ" Špetitioning€the€Judicial€Committee€of€the€Privy€Council€for€special€reave€to€appeal.€TheirŠ "$r# Šcase€thus€falls€within€the€scope€of€application€of€the€qualification€in€section€25,€paragraphŠ %X $ Š2,€further€confirming€that€no€further€local€remedy€would€have€been€available€by€way€ofŠ ī%>!% Šconstitutional€motion.Š Ō&$"& ŠĢ12.7€For€the€reasons€indicated€above,€the€Committee€is€not€satisfied€that€a€constitutionalŠ  (š#( Šmotion€would€constitute€an€effective€remedy€for€the€authors€within€the€meaning€of€articleŠ †)Ö$) Š5,€paragraph€2€(b),€of€the€Optional€Protocol.€It€therefore€includes€that€there€is€no€reason€toŠ l*¼%* Šrevise€its€decision€on€admissibility€of€24€March€1988.Š R+¢&+ ŠĢ13.1€With€respect€to€the€alleged€violation€of€article€14,€there€are€two€questions€before€theŠ -n(- ŠCommittee:€first,€whether€consideration€of€issues€relating€to€legal€representation€and€theŠ ° Šavailability€of€witnesses€amounted€to€a€violation€of€the€guarantees€for€a€fair€trial;€andŠ –ę Šsecond,€whether€there€was€undue€delay€in€the€appeal€process.€The€Committee€has€consideredŠ |Ģ Šthe€information€before€it€in€connection€with€the€trial€in€the€Home€Circuit€Court€of€KingstonŠ b² Šand€the€subsequent€appeals.Š H˜ ŠĢ13.2€As€to€the€first€issue€under€article€14,€the€Committee€notes€that€legal€representation€wasŠ  d Šavailable€to€the€authors.€Although€persons€availing€themselves€of€legal€representationŠ ś J Šprovided€by€the€State€may€often€feel€they€would€have€been€better€represented€by€a€counselŠ ą 0 Šof€their€own€choosing,€this€is€not€a€matter€that€constitutes€a€violation€of€article€14,€paragraphŠ Ę   Š3€(d),€by€the€State€party.€Nor€is€the€Committee€in€a€position€to€ascertain€whether€the€failureŠ ¬ ü  Šof€Mr.€Pratt's€lawn/or€to€insist€upon€calling€the€alibi€witness€before€the€case€was€closed€wasŠ ’ā  Ša€matter€of€professional€judgement€or€of€negligence.€That€the€Court€of€Appeal€did€not€itselfŠ xČ  Šinsist€upon€the€calling€of€this€witness€is€not€in€the€view€of€the€Committee€a€violation€ofŠ ^®  Šarticle€14,€paragraph€3€(e),€of€the€Covenant.Š D”  ŠĢ13.3€As€to€the€second€issue€under€article€14,€the€Committee€has€noted€that€the€delays€in€theŠ ` Šjudicial€proceedings€in€the€authors'€cases€constitute€a€violation€of€their€rights€to€be€heardŠ öF Šwithin€a€reasonable€time.€The€Committee€first€notes€that€article€14,€paragraph€3€(c),€andŠ Ü, Šarticle€14,€paragraph€5,€are€to€be€read€together,€so€that€the€right€to€review€of€conviction€andŠ Ā Šsentence€must€be€made€available€without€undue€delay.€In€this€context€the€Committee€recallsŠ Øų Šits€general€comment€on€article€14,€which€stipulates,€ņņinter€alia,€óóthat€"all€stages€[of€judicialŠ ŽŽ Šproceedings]€should€take€place€without€undue€delay,€and€that€in€order€to€make€this€rightŠ tÄ Šeffective,€a€procedure€must€be€available€to€ensure€that€the€trial€will€proceed€without€undueŠ ZŖ Šdelay,€both€in€first€instance€and€on€appeal".Š @ ŠĢ13.4€The€State€party€has€contended€that€the€time€span€of€three€years€and€nine€monthsŠ  \ Šbetween€the€dismissal€of€the€authors'€appeal€and€the€delivery€of€the€Court€of€Appeal's€writtenŠ ņB Šjudgement€was€attributable€to€an€oversight€and€that€the€author€should€have€asserted€theirŠ Ų( Šright€to€receive€earlier€the€written€judgement.€The€Committee€considers€that€theŠ ¾ Šresponsibility€for€the€delay€of€45€months€lies€with€the€judicial€authorities€of€Jamaica.€ThisŠ ¤ō Šresponsibility€is€neither€dependent€on€request€for€production€by€the€accused€in€a€trial€nor€isŠ Š Ś Šnon„fulfilment€of€this€responsibility€excused€by€the€absence€of€a€request€from€the€accused.Š p!Ą  ŠThe€Committee€further€observes€that€the€Privy€Council€itself€described€the€delay€asŠ V"¦! Šinexcusable€(see€para.€2.3€above).Š <#Œ" ŠĢ13.5€In€the€absence€of€a€written€judgement€of€the€Court€of€Appeal,€the€authors€were€not€ableŠ %X $ Što€proceed€to€appeal€before€the€Privy€Council,€thus€entailing€a€violation€of€article€14,Š ī%>!% Šparagraph€3€(c),€and€article€14,€paragraph€5.€In€reaching€this€conclusion€it€matters€not€thatŠ Ō&$"& Šin€the€event€the€Privy€Council€affirmed€the€conviction€of€the€authors.€The€Committee€notesŠ ŗ' #' Šthat€in€all€cases,€and€especially€in€capital€cases,€accused€persons€are€entitled€to€trial€andŠ  (š#( Šappeal€without€undue€delay,€whatever€the€outcome€of€those€judicial€proceedings€turns€outŠ †)Ö$) Što€be.Š l*¼%* ŠĢ13.6€There€are€two€issues€concerning€article€7€before€the€Committee:€the€first€i€whether€theŠ 8,ˆ', Šexcessive€delays€in€judicial€proceedings€constituted€not€only€a€violation€of€article€14,€butŠ -n(- Š"cruel,€inhuman€and€degrading€treatment".€The€possibility€that€such€a€delay€as€occurred€inŠ ° Šthis€case€could€constitute€cruel€and€inhuman€treatment€was€referred€to€by€the€Privy€Council.Š –ę ŠIn€principle€prolonged€judicial€proceedings€do€not€ņņper€se€óóconstitute€cruel,€inhuman€orŠ |Ģ Šdegrading€treatment€even€if€they€can€be€a€source€of€mental€strain€for€the€convicted€prisoners.Š b² ŠHowever,€the€situation€could€be€otherwise€in€cases€involving€capital€punishment€ax€anŠ H˜ Šassessment€of€the€circumstances€of€each€case€would€be€necessary.€In€the€preset€cases€theŠ . ~ ŠCommittee€does€not€find€that€the€authors€have€sufficiently€substantiated€their€claim€thatŠ  d Šdelay€in€judicial€proceedings€constituted€for€them€cruel,€inhuman€and€degrading€treatmentŠ ś J Šunder€article€7.Š ą 0 ŠĢ13.7€The€second€issue€under€article€7€concerns€the€issue€of€warrants€for€executing€and€theŠ ¬ ü  Šnotification€of€the€stay€of€execution.€The€issue€of€a€warrant€for€execution€necessarily€causesŠ ’ā  Šintense€anguish€to€the€individual€concerned.€In€the€authors'€case,€death€warrants€were€issuedŠ xČ  Štwice€by€the€Governor€General,€first€on€13€February€1987€and€again€on€23€February€1988.Š ^®  ŠIt€is€uncontested€that€the€decision€to€grant€a€first€stay€of€execution,€taken€at€noon€on€23Š D”  ŠFebruary€1987,€we€not€notified€to€the€authors€until€45€minutes€before€the€scheduled€time€ofŠ *z  Šthe€execution€on€24€February€1987.€The€Committee€considers€that€a€delay€of€close€to€20Š ` Šhours€from€the€time€the€stay€of€execution€was€granted€to€the€time€the€authors€were€removedŠ öF Šfrom€their€death€cell€constitutes€cruel€and€inhuman€treatment€within€the€meaning€of€articleŠ Ü, Š7.Š Ā ŠĢ14.€The€Human€Rights€Committee,€acting€under€article€5,€paragraph€4,€of€the€OptionalŠ ŽŽ ŠProtocol€to€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,€is€of€the€view€that€theŠ tÄ Šfacts€as€found€by€the€Committee€disclose€violations€of€the€Covenant€with€respect€to:Š ZŖ ŠĢ(a)€Article€7,€because€Mr.€Pratt€and€Mr.€Morgan€were€not€notified€of€a€stay€of€executionŠ &v Šgranted€them€on€23€February€1987€until€45€minutes€before€their€scheduled€execution€on€24Š  \ ŠFebruary€1987;Š ņB ŠĢ(b)€Article€14,€paragraph€3€(c)€in€conjunction€with€paragraph€5,€because€the€authors€were€notŠ ¾ Štried€without€undue€delay.Š ¤ō ŠĢ15.€It€is€the€view€of€the€Committee€that,€in€capital€punishment€cases,€States€parties€have€anŠ p!Ą  Šimperative€duty€to€observe€rigorously€all€the€guarantees€for€a€fair€rial€set€out€in€article€14€ofŠ V"¦! Šthe€Covenant.€Although€in€this€case€article€6€is€not€directly€at€issue,€in€that€capitalŠ <#Œ" Špunishment€is€not€ņņper€se€óóunlawful€under€the€covenant,€it€should€not€be€imposed€inŠ "$r# Šcircumstances€where€there€have€been€violations€by€the€State€party€of€any€of€its€obligationsŠ %X $ Šunder€the€Covenant.€The€committee€is€of€the€view€that€the€victims€of€the€violations€ofŠ ī%>!% Šarticles€14,€paragraph€3€(c),€and€7€are€entitled€to€a€remedy;€the€necessary€prerequisite€in€theŠ Ō&$"& Šarticular€circumstances€is€the€commutation€of€the€sentence.Š ŗ' #' ŠĢĢņņNotesóóŠ l*¼%* ŠĢa/€€ņņDirector€of€Public€Prosecution€v.€Nasralla€óó(1967)€2€All€ER€161.€Chapter€III€of€theŠ 8,ˆ', ŠJamaican€Constitution€concerns€the€rights€of€the€individual.