A hearing on this constitutional matter will take place in the Courthouse in Philipsburg, on Tuesday, July 2, at 9:00am.

 

After the government files its response on May 20, Government as defendant and the Ombudsman as applicant will have an opportunity to file further written submissions.  These submissions will be made in Dutch, according to a court press release.

 

Both sides will deliver their oral arguments in English, the main language in which the proceedings will be conducted.

 

Measures will be taken to ensure full access to the court hearing for the public and media, as far as possible. Live coverage of the proceedings via television and radio will be facilitated by the Registry of the Court upon request and as far as practical.

 

Ombudsman Nilda Arduin had petitioned the Constitutional Court in January for annulment of two articles in the published Penal Code related to allowing organised animal fights (e.g. cockfighting) and had asked for a review of the article imposing higher penalties for crimes committed against tourists.

 

On May 3, a case management conference was held in this first constitutional matter filed by the Ombudsman. The conference, which dealt with procedural issues, was held through a video conference with parties at the Courthouse in Philipsburg and the Caribbean Court of Justice in Trinidad.

 

President of the Constitutional Court Justice Jacob Wit presided over the conference assisted by the Registrar Maritsa James-Christina. In attendance were Nilda Arduin and Legal Counsel Marlon Hart for applicant and Attorney Richard Gibson Jr. and Herbert Coffie of the Ministry of Justice for the defendant.

 

Implementing the revised Penal Code is not really hampered by the procedure involving the Constitutional Court, because the required executing ordinance for the law to take effect has not reached Parliament yet, according to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman has also requested a constitutional review of "some legal technical issues" pertaining to procedures followed/not followed by government. These are not used as grounds for annulment.

 

The review is related to procedures for ratification date and notification to the Ombudsman, and amendments to a text approved by Parliament, e.g., a change to the numbering of the articles of law. The numbering of the articles of the Penal Code as approved by Parliament differs from the version published by Government.

 

The Ombudsman's role is to review a law for adherence to the Constitution, not ordinary moral issues, which are not protected by the Constitution, Arduin stated January. "Animal cruelty is morally wrong, but also contravenes the charge to Government by the Constitution to take care of the wellbeing of animals."

 

(The Daily Herald)