By Barbara Gayle, Staff ReporterTHE FULL Court ruled yesterday that the searches of two lawyers' offices conducted by police teams earlier this year did not constitute a breach of attorney-client privilege.
The Jamaican Bar Association and the two lawyers whose offices had been searched had filed petitions to have the searches declared unlawful, but the Full Court ruled that the search warrants complied with statutory requirements, were lawfully issued, and were indeed valid.
The provision of the Mutual Assistance (Criminal Matters) Act did not offend the constitution and therefore enabled a search of the lawyers' offices, said the ruling.
APPEAL TO BE FILED
Bar Association president, Hillary Phillips, told The Gleaner that they would be filing an appeal.
The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), as the central authority, had applied to the Resident Magistrate's Court for warrants, and the searches were carried out at the offices of attorneys-at-law Ernest Smith and Hugh Thompson in January 27 and 28 of this year.
The search and seizure of documents were to assist the Canadian Government in its investigations into money laundering and drug-related offences against 56-year-old Canadian national, Robert Bidwell.
SEARCH NOT UNLAWFUL
The DPP and the Attorney-General, who were the respondents in the case, argued that the search and seizure were not unlawful as the claimants were contending, and cited several authorities to show that there was legal basis for the police to obtain the search warrants.
Pamela Benka-Coker, Q.C., had argued for the lawyers that the Mutual Assistance (Criminal Matters) Act required that the request from the foreign state for the offices to be searched had to be in writing. The absence of such a request in writing, she said, was fatal to the issuing of the warrants.
The case was considered by Chief Justice Lensley Wolfe, Justice Karl Harrison and Justice Lloyd Hibbert, who ruled that the Director of Public Prosecutions as the central authority, could only have authorised the warrant based on information submitted to him by the Canadian prosecutors.
The court found that the treaty did not offend the Constitution of Jamaica, and on that basis, the search was legal.
"The authorities clearly show that searches and seizures of documents from lawyers' offices did not per se infringe the principle of legal professional privileges," the Full Court said.
The mere claim of privilege did not render the documents privileged, and it was for the court to decide whether or not legal professional privileges were attached to any of the documents, said the Justices.
