Attorney For ‘Livity’ Make Submissions In His Case

Horizon Adult Remand
Centre on Spanish Town Road,

Mr. Leighton ‘Livity’ Coke, the brother of former Tivoli Gardens don
Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke, over the legality of soldiers manning sections
of Horizon Adult Remand Centre on Spanish Town Road, Kingston. 

in the Supreme Court yesterday.

The lawyers in the matter are now to make written submissions on April 2.

Livity, who had been an inmate at Horizon shortly after the Tivoli Gardens operation of 2010, to apprehend his brother.

In 2012 when he was acquitted of gun-related charges and had argued that it’s illegal for Jamaica Defence Force (JDF) soldiers to
man the facility without the consent of the Defence Board or the prime

The action forms part of a suit filed by Coke seeking compensation for
allegedly being beaten and injured at the hands of soldiers in February
2012 in Horizon Adult Remand Centre. 

He was being held on allegations that he had fired at members of the police forces but was freed last year in the High Court Division of
the Gun Court.

Named as defendants in the suit filed by attorneys Carolyn Reid-Cameron
and Chukwuemeka Cameron are the commissioner of corrections, the chief
of defence staff, the Ministry of National Security and the attorney

Livity sought several declarations, including that on a “true and proper
interpretation of sections 5 and 9 of the Defence Act”, the chief of
defence staff does not have the power to deploy members of the JDF to
aid in the manning of the remand centre in question without the
direction of the Defence Board or the prime minister; that in doing so
the chief of defense staff acted ultra vires; that the commissioner of
corrections acted ultra vires and was in breach of section 5 of the
Defence Act when he appointed members of the JDF as authorized persons
to act as correctional officers at the facility.

Livity also asked the court for an award for “vindicatory damages to
reflect the sense of public outrage, emphasize the importance of the
right to life and the right not to be subjected to torture or to
inhumane and degrading treatment and to deter further breaches”.

The claimant also asked for an award of compensation for the “distress,
pain and suffering” over his period of incarceration “flowing from
the torture and inhumane treatment meted out by the respondents”.

Remember to share this article on Facebook and other Social Media Platforms

If You Enjoy Our Updates Please Make A Donation To Help Keep Our Site Going

You might also like