De Freitas also called Michael Abdul Malik v Benny
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 1975 |
| Date | 1975 |
| Court | Privy Council |
Trinidad and Tobago - Constitution - Human rights and fundamental freedoms - Imposition of death penalty for murder - Whether cruel and unusual punishment - Whether executive act in carrying out death sentence valid - Prerogative of mercy - Whether right to have advisory committee's report disclosed -
The appellant was convicted of murder in the Supreme Court of Trinidad and Tobago on August 21, 1972, and sentenced to death. His appeal against conviction was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on April 17, 1973, and a petition for special leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council was dismissed on December 12, 1973. On December 20, 1973, the appellant applied to the High Court for, inter alia, a declaration that the carrying out of the death sentence would contravene his human rights recognised under section 1 (a) and protected under section 2 (b) of the Trinidad and Tobago (Constitution) Order in Council 1962F1. The High Court dismissed the application on February 15, 1974, and its decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeal on April 30, 1974.
On appeal by the appellant to the Judicial Committee: —
Held, dismissing the appeal, (1) that the executive act of carrying out a death sentence pronounced by a court of law was authorised by laws that were in force at the commencement of the Constitution and the appellant was, therefore, debarred by section 3 of the Constitution from asserting that it abrogated, abridged or infringed any of his rights or freedoms recognised and declared in section 1 or particularised in section 2 (post, pp. 391H, 393B).
(2) That the appellant had no legal right to have disclosed to him the material furnished to the advisory committee and to the Minister on which the Minister tendered advice to the Governor-General as to the exercise of the prerogative of mercy as the exercise of the royal prerogative was solely discretionary (post, p. 395D) and not quasi-judicial.
The following case is referred to in their Lordships' report:
Director of Public Prosecutions v. Nasralla [
The following additional cases were cited in argument:
Olivier v. Buttigieg [
People v. Anderson (
Ridge v. Baldwin [
APPEAL (No. 20 of 1974) from a judgment (April 30, 1974) of the Court of Appeal of Trinidad and Tobago (Hyatali C.J., Phillips and Corbin JJ.A.) dismissing an appeal by the appellant, Michael de Freitas also called Michael Abdul Malik, from a judgment of the High Court of Trinidad and Tobago (Braithwaite J.) whereby his application for redress under section 6 of the Trinidad and Tobago (Constitution) Order in Council 1962 naming George Ramoutar Benny, Registrar of the Supreme Court, The Attorney-General of Trinidad and Tobago and Tom Iles, Commissioner of Prisons, as defendants and seeking declarations that, inter alia, a sentence of death passed upon him was unlawful and contravened the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago, was dismissed.
The facts are stated in the report of their Lordships.
At the close of the appellant's case, Lord Diplock announced that their Lordships did not wish to hear the respondents and that their Lordships would humbly advise Her Majesty that the appeal should be dismissed for reasons which their Lordships would deliver later.
Louis Blom-Cooper Q.C., G. R. Robertson and Jonathan Caplan for the appellant.
Mervyn Heald Q.C. and Stuart N. McKinnon for the respondents.
May 15. The report of their Lordships was delivered by LORD DIPLOCK.
At the conclusion of the hearing of this appeal on May 1, 1975, their Lordships announced that they would humbly advise Her Majesty that the appeal should be dismissed. They now give their reasons for tendering that advice.
The history of the matter starts on August 21, 1972, when the appellant was convicted of murder and sentenced to suffer death as a felon. By section 4 (1) of the Offences against the Person Ordinance passed in 1925, this is the mandatory penalty for murder in Trinidad and Tobago. He appealed against his conviction to the Court of Appeal. By section 51 of the
On December 20, 1973, having by now exhausted all his remedies against his conviction, he started the fresh proceedings which have given rise to the present appeal. They took the form of an application to the High Court under section 6 (1) of the Constitution for redress for an alleged contravention of certain of his human rights and fundamental freedoms under sections 1 and 2 of the Constitution, which he claimed would be violated if the death sentence on him were carried out. That application was dismissed by the High Court on February 15, 1974. His appeal from that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Neville Lewis and Others v Attorney General of Jamaica and Another
...the Attorney-General of Jamaica. Moreover, exceptionally, because the Board was being asked to review the decisions of the Board in de Freitas v. Benny [1976] A.C. 239, and in Reckley v. Minister of Public Safety and Immigration (No. 2) [1996] A.C. 527, the Attorney-General of Trinidad and......
-
Pratt et Al v Attorney General et Al
...that results in depriving Jamaican citizens of that protection. 57The majority also relied upon the judgment of the Board in de Freitas v. Benny [1976] A.C. 239. In that case which concerned the construction of the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago the time scale was wholly different fro......
-
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Bentley
... ... Craig was also found guilty of murder, but being only l6 years ... and also with a sharp pointed knife and he called out to Craig when he was arrested to start the ... 58 The second case is Defreitas v Benny (1976) AC 234 ... In that case the appellant ... ...
-
Yong Vui Kong v Attorney-General
...at present. [emphasis added] In doing so, the Court of Appeal affirmed the position in the Privy Council decision of de Freitas v Benny [1976] AC 239 (discussed at [46] below) that the decision making process of the prerogative of mercy is not reviewable in a court of law. The position in A......
-
Joint Ventures And Implied Duties Of Good Faith
...facts satisfied the business necessity test for implication of a contract term, as well as the test from Liverpool City Council v Irwin [1976] AC 239 for the implication of a term in law, on the basis that the nature of the contract as a relational contract implicitly requires (in the absen......
-
Judicial Review of Non-Statutory Executive Powers
...151 CLR 342. 54 [2002] EWCA Civ 03 (25 January 2002), [40]. 55 See Barton v The Queen (1980) 147 CLR 75. 56 See, eg, De Freitas v Benny [1976] AC 239; Reckley v Minister of Public Safety and Information (No 2) [1996] AC 527; cf Lewis v Attorney-General of Jamaica [2001] 2 AC 50; Burt v Gove......
-
Table of Cases
...Table of Cases 417 Fingleton v. he Queen (2005), 216 A.L.R. 474, [2005] HCA 34 ................................... 151 Freitas v. Benny, [1976] A.C. 239 (J.C.P.C.) ................................................................... 116 Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) .........
-
Administrative and Constitutional Law
...for any information obtained by the Home Secretary, such as a judge“s report, to be disclosed to a condemned man: de Freitas v Benny [1976] AC 239 at 247-248. This was confirmed in Thomas Reckley v Minister of Public Safety and Immigration (No 2) [1996] 1 AC 527 (‘Reckley No 2’) where Lord ......
-
The prosecution's right to appeal in Trinidad and Tobago: The State v Boyce
...23 The Judicial Committee cited with approval Director of Public Prosecutions v Nasralla [1967] 2 AC 238, and de Freitas v Benny [1976] AC 239. 24 D McKoy, 'The Evolving Constitutional Law on Prolonged Delay after Sentence' (1993) 18(1) WILJ 1. terms were nevertheless intended to be preserv......