Case Review: Attorney General v Akili Charles — How the Privy Council Struck Down Trinidad’s Ban on Bail for Murder
A review of Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago v Akili Charles ([2022] UKPC 31) and the subsequent TT$1.15 million High Court damages award reported by the Trinidad Guardian.
For nearly three decades, anyone charged with murder in Trinidad and Tobago faced an automatic, unyielding statutory barrier: Section 5(1) of the Bail Act 1994 prohibited any court or judge from even considering an application for bail on a murder charge. Because preliminary inquiries and High Court trial backlogs in Trinidad routinely stretched for 8 to 12 years, hundreds of accused persons spent a decade behind bars before a jury ever heard their case—even when the prosecution’s evidence later collapsed.
That legal reality changed forever in Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago v Akili Charles ([2022] UKPC 31), followed by a landmark High Court compensation award reported by the Trinidad and Tobago Guardian.
- Trinidad & Tobago Guardian: Family of Akili Charles gets $1.15M for landmark bail rights breach
- Trinidad & Tobago Guardian: Diego Martin family to receive over $1 million over landmark bail case
- Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (Official Judgment): Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago v Akili Charles (JCPC 2022/0034)
1. The Facts: 8½ Years on Remand Followed by a No-Case Discharge
In December 2010, Akili Charles and five co-accused were charged with the murder of Russell Antoine in Diego Martin. Because Section 5(1) of the Bail Act 1994 imposed a blanket prohibition on bail for murder, Charles was remanded to prison without the possibility of a bail hearing.
His preliminary inquiry in the Magistrates’ Court dragged on for nearly nine years, exacerbated when the presiding Chief Magistrate was elevated to the High Court without finishing her part-heard inquiries, forcing the inquiry to restart from scratch. Finally, in May 2019—after Charles had spent 8½ years in maximum-security remand—a magistrate upheld a defense “no-case submission,” ruling there was insufficient evidence to put him on trial, and discharged him immediately.
2. The Constitutional Challenge & Privy Council Ruling
Represented by Freedom Law Chambers (led by former Attorney General Anand Ramlogan SC), Charles filed a constitutional claim arguing that Section 5(1) of the Bail Act violated Sections 4 and 5 of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (the right to liberty, the presumption of innocence, and the right not to be deprived of reasonable bail without just cause).
Although the Bail Act had been passed with a special three-fifths parliamentary majority under Section 13 of the Constitution, the Court of Appeal (headed by Chief Justice Ivor Archie) and subsequently the Privy Council (in a judgment delivered by Lord Hamblen on July 28, 2022) held that the blanket ban was not “reasonably justifiable in a society that has a proper respect for the rights and freedoms of the individual.”
- Usurpation of Judicial Power: The Privy Council ruled that stripping High Court judges of all discretion to consider the strength of the evidence, the length of pre-trial delay, or the circumstances of an individual defendant violated the constitutional separation of powers.
- Public Safety Protected by Judicial Discretion: The Board emphasized that striking down a blanket ban does not mean murder suspects walk free automatically; rather, it restores the power of a High Court judge or Master to refuse bail where public safety requires it, while granting bail in deserving cases or cases of extreme prosecutorial delay.
3. The Tragic Aftermath & High Court TT$1.15 Million Damages Award
Tragically, just days after winning his historic victory at the Privy Council in July 2022, Akili Charles was fatally shot in Diego Martin. His mother, Melina Charles, continued the constitutional assessment of damages on behalf of his estate.
As reported by the Trinidad and Tobago Guardian, the High Court awarded Charles’ estate TT$1.15 million in compensatory and vindicatory damages for the unconstitutional deprivation of his right to apply for bail during his 8½-year remand. The ruling also prompted Parliament to enact the Bail (Amendment) Act, establishing structured judicial criteria for murder bail applications across Trinidad and Tobago.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a person charged with murder apply for bail in Trinidad and Tobago?
Yes. Following the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Attorney General v Akili Charles ([2022] UKPC 31), the blanket statutory prohibition on bail for murder was struck down as unconstitutional. Accused persons can apply to a High Court Judge or Master, who evaluates public safety, flight risk, and the strength of the prosecution’s evidence.
Why was Akili Charles’ estate awarded TT$1.15 million by the High Court?
Akili Charles spent 8 and a half years on remand for murder without ever being allowed to apply for bail, before a magistrate finally discharged him on a no-case submission due to insufficient evidence. The High Court awarded his estate TT$1.15 million in compensatory and vindicatory damages for the breach of his constitutional right to apply for bail.
Join the discussion on our Community Forum Thread.
Comments