KINGSTOWN, St Vincent, CMC – The Court of Appeal has dismissed the latest legal action filed by lawyers for a police woman who claims she was indecently assaulted and raped by Prime Minister Dr. Ralph Gonsalves while she was on security duty at his official residence earlier this year.

 

Gonsalves has consistently denied the allegation.

 

Lawyers for the officer had filed an appeal against the ruling of High Court judge Madame Justice Gertel Thom, given on March 11 this year, refusing to grant leave for judicial review of the decision by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Colin Williams to discontinue the case against the Prime Minister.

 

The judge said she had found "no arguable grounds for a review".

 

In February, Williams had said that the allegations were not likely to stand up in a court of law.

"What I have done is in the best interest of justice," he said then, adding, "when we look at it dispassionately, the question is, could the allegation stand up?"

Williams said the decision was reached following thorough examination of all the statements and evidence available in the matter.

 

In its ruling handed down on Monday, the three-member Appeal Court said there was no evidence of bad faith on the part of the DPP.

 

"In the absence of strong and compelling evidence of political interference, or that the Director of Public Prosecutions acted dishonestly, fraudulently or corruptly, then the presumption is that the Director of Public Prosecutions acted independently and impartially," the court said.

 

It said that based on the law and the findings of the learned trial judge, "this court can see no 'real prospect' for success of the appeal against the trial judge's decision to refuse the application for leave for judicial review of the decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions”.

 

But the judges said that consideration must also be given to some other compelling reason why the appeal should be heard.

 

They said that the court must now ask itself whether there is some other compelling reason why leave to appeal should be granted, "notwithstanding our findings that there is no real prospect of success which, in and of itself, should be a compelling reason why leave should not be granted".

 

One of the judges said that having read the written submissions on both sides "there is no area of the law applicable to this application which has not been fully aired”.

 

“I cannot help but conclude that the learned trial judge took into consideration, and did address her mind to, all the relevant issues before arriving at her decision in dismissing the applicant's application for leave to apply for judicial review,” the appeal judge said.

 

CMC/pr/dmb/08