The Court of Appeal recently made a significant decision in a constitutional claim involving the rights of crime victims. The case revolved around a rape victim who had sued the State for delays in handling her sexual assault case. In a ruling in July, the Appeal Court overturned a previous judgment that ordered the State to expedite the trial and allocate more resources, expressing that the Constitution did not provide for such rights explicitly.
The judges also dismissed an appeal filed by the victim’s attorneys and refrained from ordering her to pay legal costs, as argued by her lawyer. Despite overturning the initial ruling, the judges recognized the importance of addressing the sensitive needs of crime victims beyond just court proceedings and acknowledged the complexities of such situations.
The State’s lead attorney successfully argued that the Constitution did not entail a right to a speedy trial or a trial within a reasonable time, after reviewing the 1976 Republican Constitution thoroughly. While international conventions ratified by Trinidad and Tobago did imply such rights, the judges found they were not incorporated into domestic law.
The case centered around a rape victim who had faced delays in court proceedings since 2018. The initial ruling pointed out the traumatic impact of court proceedings on the victim’s mental health, emphasizing the need for adequate protection under the law. However, the Appeal Court found no violation of constitutional rights and reversed the compensation and other orders made in the initial ruling.
The judges highlighted the delicate balance between the rights of the accused, the victim, and the public in criminal cases. They also clarified that the courts could not direct how the State allocated its financial resources in the justice system, as that would infringe upon the separation of powers doctrine. The victim’s attorneys are now considering an appeal following the recent ruling, as the case continues to unfold in the legal system.
