Today, May 30, all eyes will be on the Supreme Court in Kingston, where Justice Andrea Thomas is set to deliver a crucial ruling on Vybz Kartel’s habeas corpus application amidst a pending decision on a retrial from the Court of Appeal.
The retrial for Kartel, whose real name is Adidja Palmer, along with his co-accused Shawn ‘Shawn Storm’ Campbell, Kahira Jones, and Andre St John, is scheduled to begin on June 10.
Yesterday, the habeas corpus application seeking the release of Palmer, Campbell, and St John was adjourned until 2 p.m. today. The submissions, presented by the applicants’ attorney Isat Buchanan, did not address the fourth co-accused, Jones, who reportedly has another case before the court.
The men were convicted in 2014 for the 2011 murder of Clive ‘Lizard’ Williams, who was allegedly killed after failing to return two unlicensed guns given to him by Kartel. Kartel and his co-accused have denied involvement in Williams’ death. In March, the Privy Council quashed their murder convictions due to juror misconduct and referred the case back to the Court of Appeal to decide on a retrial.
Buchanan explained that the habeas corpus application arose due to a legal gap that is depriving the appellants of their liberty, referencing the apex court’s decision over two months ago. He argued there is no legal basis for their continued detention since neither the Privy Council nor the Court of Appeal has issued an order for it.
“The principle is straightforward. Without an order from the Privy Council or the Court of Appeal, there is no legal basis for the continued detention of the applicants. There is nothing in Jamaican law that contemplates this situation,” Buchanan stated.
He mentioned that after querying the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) on the authority for the men’s continued detention, he was directed back to the court. The attorney general and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions are the second and third respondents in the application.
Buchanan emphasized that the men are no longer considered convicts due to the quashed convictions. He argued that current legislation allows Justice Thomas to release the men unconditionally or set conditions for their release pending the Court of Appeal hearing.
Justice Thomas, noting that the sentencing no longer exists, indicated she would issue her judgment today.
Lisa Whyte and Paula-Sue Ferguson represent the first, second, and third respondents. Whyte’s initial submission was halted by Justice Thomas for being off-topic, prompting her to realign her arguments. Whyte argued that the Privy Council’s judgment does not automatically mandate the applicants’ release, which remains a matter for the Court of Appeal to decide.
Ferguson concurred that the habeas corpus application was inappropriate at this time, citing the need for the Court of Appeal to either order an acquittal or a new trial following the Privy Council’s quashing of the convictions.
