GOV'T DEFENDS POLICE SEARCH

THE justice minister, A J Nicholson yesterday defended this week's police
search of the offices of two lawyers looking for damning information on a
Jamaican who Canadian law enforcement are seeking to extradite to answer
drug charges.

But last night the Council of the Jamaican Bar Association agreed at a
meeting to stage a silent protest in Parliament on Tuesday to highlight
what they consider to be a breach of constitutional rights and
lawyer/client privilege.

Earlier, even as Nicholson was insisting that the searches of the offices
of Ernest Smith and Hugh Thompson were legally conducted and carried out
with decency, the Bar Association was hitting out at the action, warning
that it set a dangerous precedent.

"Every citizen is entitled to consult his attorney without fear that the
judge, prosecutor or police will be privy to those consultations," the Bar
Association's president, Hilary Phillips, QC, said in a statement. "All
communications between attorney and client are inviolable and privileged.
This right is protected under the constitution, the common law and
international human rights law."

Smith, who has offices in Brown's Town, St Ann and Kingston, and Thompson,
partner in the Kingston firm of Gifford, Thompson and Bright, represent
Robert Bidwell, who is in custody in Jamaica awaiting extradition hearings.

The Canadians say that Bidwell was involved in drug trafficking in that
country and apparently claim that he laundered the proceeds by investing in
real estate and other businesses in Jamaica, apparently using the names of
family and other people.

Tuesday's searches, on warrants issued by Magistrate Martin Gayle, were
covered by the Mutual Assistance (Criminal Matters) Act of 1995 and
facilitated by a treaty between Jamaica and Canada. It was not immediately
clear whether this section of the law was being invoked for the first time.

The officers executing the warrants, Nicholson said, were carefully
instructed how the search should be conducted. "In particular clear
instructions were given concerning how to handle documents where it was
claimed they were subject to legal professional privilege," he said.

"The searches were appropriately conducted...," the justice minister added.

According to Nicholson, while Canadian officers were present they did not
participate in the searches and these were carried out either in the
presence of the lawyers themselves or their representatives.

He claimed that files were examined only to establish whether they were
relevant to the warrant. "There was no trawling through files and reading
of documents," Nicholson insisted.

He added: "The files seized were placed in boxes and sealed in the presence
of the lawyers. A list of these files were compiled in each case and the
list was signed by the respective lawyers or their representatives.

"The search procedures and imminent court application are consistent with
guidelines approved in decided case law."

Nicholson said that the director of public prosecution, who acts as
Jamaica's Central Authority in the legal mutual assistance agreements,
would "expeditiously apply to a judge of the Supreme Court to determine the
issue whether legal professional privilege attaches to any of the seized
documents".

"At this application, legal representatives for the lawyers whose chambers
were searched will be entitled to be present and to be heard on all
issues," Nicholson said.

The Bar Association, however, was far from satisfied with Nicholson's
explanation, declaring the searches to be "an attack on the constitutional
rights and privileges of each and every citizen of Jamaica".

The reliance on the Mutual Assistance (Criminal Matters) Act, the
association said, was "entirely misplaced".

It also criticised Magistrate Gayle for issuing the search warrants when he
was scheduled to hear Bidwell's extradition proceedings -- a claim that
could not be immediately confirmed.