Volume 06 Issue 11 November 2023
1D. Gaël Henriette-Bolli, 2Viraj Fulena, 3Hemant B. Chittoo, 4Emily Payen
1D. Gaël Henriette-Bolli: is a Lecturer in Law at the Open University of Mauritius.
2Viraj Fulena: is a Lecturer in Law at the University of Technology Mauritius.
3Hemant B. Chit too: is Professor in Public Policy and Management at the University of Technology Mauritius.
4Emily Payen: is an Independent Researcher.
DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v6-i11-70Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT
This research paper examines the role of the provisional charge practice within the criminal procedure of Mauritius and its impact on the overall criminal justice process, with a focus on arbitrary arrests and violations of the Right to Liberty. It also conducts a comparative analysis of similar practices in the United Kingdom, France and South Africa. The study finds that the issues associated with the provisional charge in Mauritius are prevalent in the selected countries, highlighting the importance of police involvement in the charging process. The study concludes that even jurisdictions with strong legal frameworks can experience abuses of power and violations of the Right to Liberty, emphasizing the need for integrity and safeguards within the criminal justice system.
KEYWORDS:Provisional Charge, Right to Liberty, Constitutional Rights, Inhuman Treatment, Human Rights, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
REFERENCES Legislations1) African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights Legal instruments, https://www.achpr.org/legalinstruments/detail?id=49. Accessed on 30 October 2022.
2) Art. 49, Code de procédure pénale (France)
3) Constitution of South Africa, 1996, s 36.
4) Constitution of South Africa, 1996.
5) Constitution of South Africa, s 35.
6) Constitution of Kenya, 2010.
7) Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, s 49 (South Africa).
8) Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 (South Africa).
9) Human Rights Act 1998, s 5 (UK).
10) Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, s 24 (UK).
11) Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, s 41 (UK).
12) Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 Code G (UK).
13) Police Act 1974 (Mauritius).
14) Persons deprived of liberty act 2014 (Kenya).
15) The Constitution 1968, s 5( 5) (Mauritius).
16) The Constitution of Kenya, 2010.
Bibliography
1) Bowling, B., & Coretta, P. (2007). Disproportionate and Discriminatory: Reviewing the Evidence on Police Stop and Search. Modern Law Review, 70(6), 936 - 961.
2) Cassamayor, Le Bras Séculier: Justice et Police, (1960).
3) Coste, François-Louis. « Deux révisions. Les affaires Dils et Sécher », Histoire de la justice, vol. 30, no. 1, (2020).
4) Dave Opiyo And Caroline Wafula, Kenya: Police's Ability to Prosecute Cases Put to Question, Dec 2007, https://allafrica.com/stories/200712270986.html. Accessed on 30 October 2022.
5) Dido Madina Diana, Critical analysis of the development of prosecutorial independence, 2018, Strathmore University of Law.
6) H A P Fisher, Report of an inquiry into the circumstances leading to the trial of three persons on charges arising out of the death of Maxwell Confait, Dec 1977, p 10.
7) Jacqueline Hodgson, Police, the Prosecutor and the Juge D'Instruction: Judicial Supervision in France, Theory and Practice, (2001). https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/police-prosecutor-and-juge-dinstruction-judicial-supervision-france. Accessed on 30 October 2022.
8) Jennifer Brown, Police powers: detention and custody, (House of Commons Library 2021).
9) Justice Malala, High-profile criminal cases expose inequality in South Africa's justice system, (The Guardian, Nov 2014), https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/04/south-africa-crime-oscar-pistorius-wealth-power. Accessed on 30 October 2022.
10) Kennes, Laurent et Scalia, Damien. "Du juge d'instruction vers le juge de l'enquête. Analyse critique et de droit comparé."
11) Law Reform Commission, Draft Police and criminal evidence bill, Opinion Paper, (March 2012).
12) Lucie Jouvet Legrand, Socio-anthropologie de l’erreur judiciaire, (Mars 2010).
13) Martin Schönteich, Introduction, Assessing the crime fighters The Ability of the Criminal Justice System to solve and Prosecute crime, (1999).
14) Meindl, Thomas. « Les implications constitutionnelles de la suppression du juge d'instruction », Revue de science criminelle et de droit pénal comparé, vol. 2, no. 2, (2010).
15) Migai Akech, Kenya: Justice sector and the rule of law, (March 2011).
16) Mireille Delmas-Marty - Serge Lasvignes, La mise en état des affaires pénales, (Janvier 1991).
17) Mukuha G, The role of police prosecutors in Kenya' Unpublished LLB Thesis, University of Nairobi,. Nairobi, (1990).
18) Mylonaki, E., & Burton, T. (2010). A Critique of the Deficiencies in the Regulation of Contemporary Police Powers of Detention and Questioning in England and Wales. The Police Journal, 83(1), 61–79.
19) Oak Foundation, Uniting to stop indefinite detention in the UK (May 27, 2021), https://oakfnd.org/uniting-to-stop-indefinite-detention-in-the-uk/. Accessed on 30 October 2022.
20) Official Statistics, Police Misconduct, England and Wales year ending 31 March 2021, https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/police-misconduct-england-and-wales-year-ending-31-march-2021/police-misconduct-england-and-wales-year-ending-31-march-2021. Accessed on 30 October 2022.
21) Pierre Lyon-Caen, Le juge d’instruction: La menace d’une repression (2010).
22) Renaud van Ruymbeke, Le juge d'instruction, (Presses Universitaires de France (PUF) 1988).
23) Satyajit Boolell, Provisional Charge Conundrum, E-Newsletter Dec 2015, Office of DPP.
24) Satyajit Boolell, Time to bring the Police and Criminal Justice Act, E-Newsletter May 2022.
25) Silvia Randazzo, Human Rights and Deprivation of Liberty in Kenya, (2016).