The Tribune

By AVA TURNQUEST

Tribune Staff Reporter

aturnquest@tribunemedia.net

LAWYER Fred Smith yesterday apologised to Attorney General Allyson Maynard Gibson if “his public utterances conveyed the impression that she was personally victimising” him.

However, Mr Smith said that while his statements were not made against Mrs Maynard-Gibson personally, her office was “constitutionally responsible” for his “malicious” criminal prosecution.

He said: “I accept that the Attorney General is telling the truth when she says she was not personally consulted, and in the circumstances I proffer my full apologies to her if my public utterances conveyed the impression that she was personally victimising me. Of course, I did not mean that!

“The fact remains, however, that the Office of the Attorney General remains constitutionally responsible for this malicious criminal prosecution of me.

“I was merely investigating evidence of wrong doing in a high profile case mounted against the Government which she has the Constitutional Responsibility to advise, as she likewise has for all criminal prosecutions including the one mounted against me!”

But, he added, “the fact that I mistakenly assumed the Attorney General must have been consulted before the charges were allowed to proceed against me is a reflection of just how unbelievable and iniquitous the proceedings are.”

He added that it was “astounding” that she was not consulted on such a high profile matter.

Mr Smith, a human rights lawyer and Queen’s Counsel, pleaded not guilty in magistrate’s court to a single charge of causing harm to another man.

He was released on his own recognizance after being charged earlier in the week.

The charge came after an incident at Jaws Beach, when Smith’s alleged victim claimed that Smith knocked him down on April 25.

Also charged in connection with the Jaws Beach incident is lawyer Keod Smith, who pleaded not guilty to charges of assault, threats of harm and causing damage.

He was granted bail in the amount of $1,500.

Yesterday, Fred Smith said the pending trial has brought the legal profession and the office of Queen’s Counsel into disrepute.

He said the charges follow a complaint made by an individual who represents a group that he – Fred Smith – is currently investigating as part of a suit against the Government.

Yesterday, Mr Smith said: “During my 35 years as an attorney at The Bahamas Bar, I have never been arrested or charged. It was entirely foreseeable that people would question whether the high-profile litigation and the arrest were connected.

He said: “The issues at stake are about far more than me and Keod Smith and me and the Attorney General. At the heart of this matter lies the Rule of Law and respect for our democracy.

“What kind of nation are we if citizens cannot question political activities without fearing the repercussions, if political principles are sacrificed for political expediency? If the Environment continues to be sacrificed at the Altar of the Almighty Dollar?”

Mr Smith reiterated that the Attorney General is ultimately responsible for all criminal prosecutions under Article 78 of the Constitution, Sections 54 to 56 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and Section 39 of the Police Act.

“In addition,” he said, “by Constitutional Convention and Custom she has Ministerial Responsibility for the acts and omissions of her agents, such as the Commissioner of Police when laying criminal charges.

“She, as Attorney General,” he said, “remains Constitutionally responsible for the embarrassing public pillory of me being paraded before the courts as a common criminal and bringing my reputation and good name into public odium, ridicule and contempt.”

The attorney general criticised Mr Smith for “disparaging comments” made against her and the Attorney General’s office at the time of his arraignment last Friday.

She added that if Mr Smith failed to take advantage of the opportunity to correct the “egregious wrong” that he has committed against her, she reserved the right to take “further action.”

Despite Mr Smith’s impression, Mrs Maynard-Gibson said that his case was never directed to her or her office.
Mrs Maynard-Gibson said that as a lawyer, especially as a Queen’s Counsel, Mr Smith is aware, that under the Police Act, the police bring prosecutions in the Magistrates’ Courts on a daily basis without reference to the Attorney General’s Office and without seeking the advice of the Attorney General.
Mrs Maynard-Gibson said that any suggestion by Mr Smith that there was a “political decision at the very highest level” that resulted in his charge before the court is “totally unfounded and untruthful.”