Worme and another v Commissioner of Police of Grenada

JurisdictionUK Non-devolved
JudgeLord Rodger of Earlsferry
Judgment Date29 January 2004
Neutral Citation[2004] UKPC 8
CourtPrivy Council
Docket NumberAppeal No. 71 of 2002
Date29 January 2004
(1) George Worme
and
(2) Grenada Today Limited
Appellants
and
The Commissioner of Police
Respondent

[2004] UKPC 8

Present at the hearing:-

Lord Bingham of Cornhill

Lord Browne-Wilkinson

Lord Slynn of Hadley

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe

Appeal No. 71 of 2002

Privy Council

[Delivered by Lord Rodger of Earlsferry]

1

In 1999 the first appellant, Mr George Worme, was the editor of the weekly newspaper "Grenada Today" which was published by the second appellant, Grenada Today Ltd. The issue dated 17 September 1999 included a letter signed "The People's Man" and addressed to the Prime Minister (Dr Keith Mitchell). It was printed under the heading "Doc, stop playing politics". The letter was critical of the Prime Minister's attitude towards teachers' pay. It included this sentence:

"During the election campaign you spent million of dollars to bribe people to vote for you and your party, disregarding what the law says governing the electoral process."

Their Lordships understand that elections to the House of Representatives, which Dr Mitchell's party won, were held on 14 January 1999.

2

Following publication of the letter, Mr Worme was invited to attend at the Central Division of the Criminal Investigation Department of the Royal Grenada Police. He went there on 21 September, accompanied by his lawyer. The police put a number of written questions to him about Grenada Today Ltd, about the Grenada Today newspaper and about the letter. He answered the questions and was not arrested or charged.

3

In the next issue, published on 24 September 1999, Grenada Today reprinted the letter preceded by these words:

"The letter which angered Prime Minister Mitchell and forced him to attempt to use law enforcement officers of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) to try and 'silence' the GRENADA TODAY newspaper."

4

Three days later, on 27 September, the Prime Minister raised civil proceedings for libel against Mr Worme and Grenada Today Ltd in relation to the publication of the letter. The next day, 28 September, the police arrested Mr Worme and charged him with two offences, relating respectively to the publication of the letter on 17 and 24 September. The charge relating to the first publication was in these terms:

"For that the Defendant on Friday the 17th day of September, 1999, at St John Street in the town of St George Southern Magisterial District, did publish a Defamatory Libel concerning Keith Claudius MITCHELL, Prime Minister of Grenada, in the form of a letter under the caption 'Doc stop playing Politics', which said letter contained the following Defamatory matter concerning the said Keith Claudius MITCHELL, 'During the Election Campaign you spent million of dollars to bribe people to vote for you and your Party disregarding what the Law says governing the Electorial Process,' with an intention to defame the said Keith Claudius MITCHELL.

Contrary to Section 252(2) of the Criminal Code Chapter 1 of Volume 1 of the 1994 Revised Laws of GRENADA."

The charge relating to the publication of the letter on 24 September was identical in all respects save for the date of the alleged offence. Subsequently, two summonses were served on Grenada Today Ltd to answer charges in terms that were in all material respects identical to those of the two charges on which Mr Worme had been arrested. All the charges were of intentional libel, contrary to section 252(2) of the Criminal Code of Grenada ("the Code"). The civil action brought by the Prime Minister against the appellants has been stayed pending the determination of the criminal proceedings.

5

On 19 October 1999 the Chief Magistrate began a preliminary inquiry into the charges, which was adjourned, without any evidence being led, until 18 January 2000. On that date the prosecution led the evidence of the Prime Minister. After his examination-in-chief had been completed, counsel for the appellants made a submission to the effect that the relevant provisions of Title XIX of the Code, relating to libel, were inconsistent with the appellants' right to freedom of expression under section 10 of the Constitution of Grenada ("the Constitution"). He asked the Chief Magistrate to refer the matter to the High Court. Under section 16(3) of the Constitution, which their Lordships set out below, when so requested, the Chief Magistrate was obliged to make the reference. She duly stated a case with three questions for the decision of the High Court:

"(1) Does the freedom of expression guaranteed by section 10 of the Constitution of Grenada protect a freedom to publish material:

  • (a) discussing political matters

  • (b) of and concerning the conduct of public figures in relation to the election of persons to the House of Representatives of the Parliament of Grenada

  • (c) in relation to the suitability of persons for office as members of the House of Representatives of the Parliament of Grenada?

(2) If the answer is yes to any part or parts of question 1, is the guaranteed freedom of expression under section 10 of the Constitution of Grenada violated by section 252(2) of the Criminal Code of Grenada which makes a person liable to imprisonment for two years if convicted of intentional libel, such intentional libel being defined by section 253 of the Criminal Code as the unlawfully publishing by a person of 'any defamatory matter' concerning another person with intention to defame that person?

(3) If the answer is yes to any part or parts of question 1, is the guaranteed freedom of expression under section 10 of the Constitution of Grenada being violated by the Director of Public Prosecutions sanctioning these criminal prosecutions by the State for such criminal defamatory intentional libel when the subject of the alleged libels herein concerns the reputation of an individual and does not touch and concern any public interest?"

The fact that the Chief Magistrate had to refer the constitutional points to the High Court at this stage in the proceedings means, of course, that they have had to be determined without the facts being explored.

6

In a judgment dated 9 November 2000 Alleyne J answered Questions 1 and 2 in the affirmative and found it unnecessary to answer Question 3. The Commissioner of Police appealed to the Court of Appeal who, by judgment dated 5 June 2001, allowed his appeal. In so doing the Court of Appeal, like Alleyne J, answered Question 1 in the affirmative, but then went on to answer both Questions 2 and 3 in the negative. On 19 November 2001 the Court of Appeal granted final leave to appeal to their Lordships' Board.

The Constitution

7

The Constitution is to be found in schedule 1 to the Grenada Constitution Order 1973 ("the Order") which came into force when Grenada became an independent state on 7 February 1974. Chapter I of the Constitution, comprising sections 1 to 18, is entitled "Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms". Section 1 provides inter alia:

"Whereas every person in Grenada is entitled to the fundamental rights and freedoms, that is to say, the right, whatever his race, place of origin, political opinions, colour, creed or sex, but subject to respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for the public interest, to each and all of the following, namely –

(b) freedom of conscience, of expression and assembly and association

the provisions of this Chapter shall have effect for the purpose of affording protection to those rights and freedoms subject to such limitations of that protection as are contained in these provisions, being limitations designed to ensure that the enjoyment of the said rights and freedoms by any person does not prejudice the rights and freedoms of others or the public interest."

Section 8(2)(a) provides that "Every person who is charged with a criminal offence … shall be presumed to be innocent until he is proved or has pleaded guilty". Section 10, again so far as relevant, is in these terms:

"(1) Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions without interference, freedom to receive ideas and information without interference, freedom to communicate ideas and information without interference (whether the communication be to the public generally or to any person or class of persons) and freedom from interference with his correspondence.

(2) Nothing contained in or done under the authority of any law shall be held to be inconsistent with or in contravention of this section to the extent that the law in question makes provision –

(b) that is reasonably required for the purpose of protecting the reputations, rights and freedoms of other persons or the private lives of persons concerned in legal proceedings …

and except so far as that provision or, as the case may be, the thing done under the authority thereof, is shown not to be reasonably justifiable in a democratic society."

Section 16(3) and (4), which govern the present proceedings, provide:

"(3) If in any proceedings in any court (other than the Court of Appeal, the High Court or a court martial) any question arises as to the contravention of any of the provisions of sections 2 to 15 (inclusive) of this Constitution, the person presiding in that court may, and shall if any party to the proceedings so requests, refer the question to the High Court unless, in his opinion, the raising of the question is merely frivolous or vexatious.

(4) Where any question is referred to the High Court in pursuance of subsection (3) of this section, the High Court shall give its decision upon the question and the court in which the question arose shall dispose of the case in accordance with that decision or, if that decision is the subject of an appeal to the Court of Appeal or to Her Majesty in Council, in accordance with the decision of the Court...

To continue reading

Request your trial
28 cases
  • Charles Roger Richardson v Lyndon D Raynor (Police Sergeant)
    • Bermuda
    • Supreme Court (Bermuda)
    • 12 Agosto 2011
    ...and Commissioner of Police [1982] Bda LR 2 Attride-Stirling v Attorney GeneralBDLR [1995] Bda LR 6 Worme v Commissioner of PoliceUNK [2004] UKPC 8 Hall v Bermuda Bar Council [1983] Bda LR 1 Raichinov v BulgariaHRC (2008) 46 EHRR 28 Gavrilovici v Moldova ECHR Application 25264/05 Grobbelaar ......
  • Dominic Suraj and 4 others v Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago
    • United Kingdom
    • Privy Council
    • 20 Junio 2022
    ...the different stages of analysis: paras 114(a) and 115. They referred to the judgment of the Board in Worme v Comr of Police of Grenada [2004] 2 AC 430, which concerned the constitution of Grenada, in order to suggest that the proviso in section 13(1) does not incorporate a proportionality ......
  • Rabone and another v Pennine Care NHS Trust
    • United Kingdom
    • Supreme Court
    • 8 Febrero 2012
    ... ... This was a case about the alleged failure of the police to protect the Osman family who had been subjected to threats and ... Department v AF (No 3) [2010] 2 AC 269 and in R (GC) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2011] 1 WLR 1230 —but did not exist in ... ...
  • Satyanand Maharaj
    • United Kingdom
    • Privy Council
    • 20 Junio 2022
    ...the different stages of analysis: paras 114(a) and 115. They referred to the judgment of the Board in Worme v Comr of Police of Grenada [2004] 2 AC 430, which concerned the constitution of Grenada, in order to suggest that the proviso in section 13(1) does not incorporate a proportionality ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
  • Our Inherent Constitution
    • Jamaica
    • Transitions in Caribbean Law The habits of constitutionalism
    • 21 Noviembre 2013
    ...UKPC 10, (2006) 68 WIR 10 (Bah); Grant v R [2006] UKPC 2, (2006) 68 WIR 354 (Ja); Ingraham v McEwan (2002) 65 WIR 1 (CA Bah); Worme v COP [2004] UKPC 8, (2004) 63 WIR 79 (Gren); R v Hughes [2002] UKPC 12, (2001) 60 WIR 156 (St Luc); Benjamin v Minister of Information and Broadcasting [2001]......
  • Privy Council
    • United Kingdom
    • Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 68-5, October 2004
    • 1 Octubre 2004
    ...Privy CouncilGrenada: Criminal Libel—ConstitutionalityWorme vCommissioner of Police of Grenada[2004] UKPC 8The weekly newspaper Grenada Today published a letter addressed to thePrime Minister, Dr Keith Mitchell, and signed ‘The People’s Man’. Itcontained the following sentence: ‘During the ......
  • Recent Case: General principles and specific crimes
    • South Africa
    • South African Criminal Law Journal No. , August 2019
    • 24 Mayo 2019
    ...not inconsistent with the Constitution, Streicher JA in closing cited the case of Worme and another v Commissioner of Police of Grenada [2004] UKPC 8, where the Privy Council had to decide upon the constitutionality of the statu-tory crime of intentional libel, in the context of the protect......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT