Email

Print

Here's what he told us:

Godfrey Smith - Attorney for Karol Mello
"Karol Mello was granted Habeas Corpus, which means he was ordered to be released from prison. Following that, the State Government brought 2 charges against him for perjury and for uttering upon a passport that was not valid. He was granted bail, and this morning was set for the commencement of the prosecution in relation to those charges. Essentially, what transpired in court, is that the prosecution informed the Magistrate that they had no instructions to prosecute this matter, and the Attorney General Ministry, being responsible for civil matters, obviously didn't have the power to prosecute the matter. The Magistrate asked the prosecution to reconfirm what his instructions were, and the prosecutor came back to report to the Magistrate, that based on the fact that the DPP's Office was not going to have the matter prosecuted, that his instructions were from the AG Ministry that the charges should be withdrawn. So, in relation to the charge of uttering, that has been dismissed by the Magistrate, and in relation to the perjury, that has been withdrawn. It is open to the state to bring back the charge of perjury, if they so wish at a later time, but not in relation to the charge of uttering on an invalid passport. So, as the matter now stands, there are currently no criminal charges pending against Mr. Mello."

Daniel Ortiz
"Sir, this is an extremely strange turn of events. I was at all the sittings, and the Attorney General Ministry - and the prosecution, it would seem - was gung ho for Mr. Mello to be expelled, and now that this matter has been brought to the Magistrate's Court, it has strangely been withdrawn. What should be taken from this?"

Godfrey Smith
"I think really that's a matter for the DPP's Office, and the AG Ministry to explain. My own personal view is that it's a matter of the AG Ministry not - well - trespassing on the criminal jurisdiction of the DPP's Office, not consulting, doing its own thing and then throwing the file on the DPP's Office and saying, 'Well, we've done all of this. Go ahead and prosecute.' That's what I think happened."

Daniel Ortiz
"Sir, I was keeping abreast of some of the articles from the Slovak Republic and Europe, and some of these articles show us in a very poor light. It makes it seems as though we are harboring a criminal in our country. Does this withdraw sort of advance that image to the International Community?"

Godfrey Smith
"Well, I am not sure that I am positioned to speak to that at all. I am Mr. Karol Mello's attorney, and legal advisor. My job is to ensure that before he is removed from Belize, or if charges are brought against him, he is accorded his rights under the law. And that's all I've been concerned to do."

Daniel Ortiz
"Sir, so what is the next step? What can the DPP do in terms of continuous criminal prosecution against Mr. Mello?"

Godfrey Smith
"That's a matter for the State, the DPP's Office and the Police. We just have to wait and see what the next move will be, if any."

Daniel Ortiz
"I imagine that the family is relieved that these charges are withdrawn and struck out. What is their position at this current moment? Will they continue to reside in Belize? What can be done for Mr. Mello's residency which was withdrawn by the Belizean Government?"

Godfrey Smith
"We haven't had time to look at that, but in relation to the first part of your question, his intention is to stay in Belize. So, the authorities and the State need not harbor any fears that he intends to flee. He does not intend to flee, and any charge that is brought, we intend to face and deal with here in Belize."

We contacted the Director of Public Prosecutions who declined comment. We also attempted to contact the Solicitor General and the Deputy Solicitor General, and we were informed that they were unavailable.

But, bottom line it appears that as smith says, the Sol Gen's office brought the charges - which is irregular in itself - and did not consult with the DPP's office. So when time came to prosecute, no prosecution could be made because - as we understand it - the DPP's office had not been consulted on nor had they even seen the file.