Posted by Hiuare on 15/5/2006, 1:35 pm, in reply to "Re: 2 Ministers Bail" 2. In response to the above, in Solomon Islands, reliance on bail application to any accused is still made under the common law. In absence of a Bail Act, the determination of bail is largely made on a case to case basis. In essence, there are no specific or strict guidelines to assist the Court in determining bail. However, the general guideline which the court is bound to observe is to balance the common law right to bail with the fundamental rights that afforded to any accused under the SI Constitution. Brown test which I agree is one of many that the Parliament or Courts have to develop with regards to the development of bail laws in SI. 3. The issue of whether the Magistrate had exercised that discretion objectively or just, is always unsafe to accept since its open ended. 4. For this matter, how much weight the Magistrate had placed upon exercising his discretion to balance the weight of the evidence submitted in Court? How much weight he placed upon the changing circumstances of the accused as being Ministers of the State? Did the Dr. produced the medical report was called to Court and examined in Court to prove the merit of that report? Further to that did the Magistrate called other experienced doctors to counter or verify that? Did the Magistrate called upon the prison doctors or medical officers whoever that might be responsible for providing specific diagnosis to the accused? Imaging his sugar level is within the range of 24-26 and all human being the level which we must have is 4-6. That clearly indicates the Magistrate to take the opinions of those medical doctors. Based on those medical professional opinions, the Magistrate would exercise his discretion? If any of this has not been done, then, what weight the Magistrate had adduced out of the evidence to totally ignored the Defence grounds. Because of this, the Magistrate dispensing of his discretionary power in the present case was not seen to be done fairly. 6. Perhaps, since this discretionary test is always unsafe to adopt on case to case basis, this warrants the State to enact a Bail Act in order to give clearer tests when determining bail application. 7. In the next coming days, it would be interesting to see what test the Court would employ when determining conditional bail, which is construed under section 10(3) of
202.151.28.44
1. Thank you JAK for that in depth reply which gives greater insight into the present issue of bail.
5. Total denial as in the present case, based on the Brown’s test of discretion draw doubts on the legal nexus exists between the common law rights and the accused Constitutional rights.
Message Thread:
« Back to thread