D.P.P. takes on attorney for former P.M. Said Musa
Arguments were presented today by Director of Public Prosecutions Cheryl-Lynn Branker-Taitt in the judicial review of Magistrate Earl Jones ruling to commit former Prime Minister Said Musa to stand trial in the Supreme Court. Musa is facing charges for the theft of ten million US dollars from the government of Venezuela. In court this morning Branker-Taitt responded to arguments presented by Attorneys for Musa on Monday. On the issue of wrongful jurisdiction, the D.P.P. argued that the offence was committed in Belize according to section five of the Indictable Procedure Act. She submitted that Musa made the decision to use a portion of the Venezuela funds in Belize and that set in motion a chain of events that ended with the monies being paid to the Universal Health Services. Branker-Taitt also stated that Musa misled the Venezuelans in a letter to Bandes Bank which cited damage caused by several hurricanes and debts incurred to start the reconstruction process. That was followed by information of where funds were to be deposited, which the D.P.P. argued may have implied that the change in transfer would facilitate bank loans for housing. But Chief Justice Abdulai Conteh was not satisfied that the transfer of funds can be classified as Theft. The C.J. said that while Musa’s actions may be politically questionable and perhaps even stupid, (quote) “Stupidity is not equivalent to dishonesty” (unquote). The D.P.P. also submitted that Musa acted in breach of section ten of the Finance and Audit Act, which states that money granted to Belize is to be deposited in a certain fund and there are procedures required to withdraw from that fund. This was not done with the ten million U.S. In response to a submission that it was perverse, irrational, and unreasonable to commit Musa, Branker-Taitt said that the magistrate was entitled to commit him regardless of the fact that Ralph Fonseca was freed of the same charge. But she did find herself in a difficult position, saying that while she is against Fonseca being discharged, Musa’s committal should stand. The D.P.P. also argued that the deposition provided was admissible according to Section forty-seven of the Criminal Procedure Act. At around five this afternoon, the D.P.P. emerged from the Court and spoke briefly saying only that she is not ready to comment.
Cheryl-Lynn Branker-Taitt, Director of Public Prosecutions
“I’m not going to make any comment as yet. Perhaps after the Chief Justice has given his decision.”
The case continues Wednesday with rebuttals from the attorneys for Musa.
