On May 25, 2006 the Court of Appeal dismissed an application before it, stating that it found no merit on any of the grounds advanced by the Majors’ attorney, Michael Kemp.
Mr. Kemp had argued on the grounds that the committal warrant for Mrs. Major was invalid and that prosecutors had failed to disclose material evidence.
He also argued that recorded conversations between the Majors and their alleged co-conspirators be deemed inadmissible and the Listening Devices Act declared unconstitutional.
The Majors want to fight the court’s decision to dismiss their application at the Privy Council and were granted 90 days to secure the requisite documents along with a security fee of just over $5,000.
The couple is fighting extradition to the United States on drug trafficking charges. They have insisted that they are being unlawfully detained.
A U.S grand jury indicted the pair on conspiring to import and attempting to import cocaine and Indian hemp into the U.S between August 2002 and January 2003 using go-fast boats.
Warrants for their arrests were issued the same day.
During the court proceedings on Wednesday, Justice Hartman Longley, Justice Emmanuel Osadebay and Justice Milton L. Ganpatsingh were going to strike the application before the court out, stating that the jurisdiction of the court had already been exhausted.
According to Justice Ganpatsingh, the Majors had 21 days to file an appeal on that application. However, he said they failed to do so in the allotted time.
He said the court did not have jurisdiction to hear another application on that matter.
After the justice spoke, both Keva and Dwight stood and told the court that they had signed documents in the allotted time to appeal the court of appeal’s decision.
Mr. Major questioned how he and his wife could be out of time if in fact they signed documents on June 6.
“I am lost for words that me and my husband’s case has been dismissed,” Mrs. Major said. “We signed the documents before the deadline and now today we are being told that the application is being dismissed. What does this mean? My husband and I are not attorneys and we definitely can’t defend ourselves from behind Fox Hill gates.”
Mr. Kemp then stood and told the justices that he had indeed sent in a letter notifying the court that he had planned to appeal on behalf of his clients, but Justice Ganpatsingh told him the letter was incorrectly worded and should have not been accepted by the court to begin with.
He read the letter and said it was addressed to the Privy Council, notifying the high court that an application would be filed on behalf of the Majors.
Justice Ganpatsingh said the letter was filed in the Court of Appeal even though it was addressed to the London court.
On those grounds the justices were ready to strike the application out.
But Justice Ganpatsingh told the Majors he would not deny them the opportunity to take their case to the Privy Council and granted them the 90-day leave.
After the 90 days have passed, the Majors will have to return to the Court of Appeal to be granted the final leave to go to the Privy Council.
This is the final time that the Majors would be allowed to appeal the matter.
By: Bianca Symonette, The Bahama Journal
