‘GUILTY until proven innocent…’

As Law persons we are aware of the principle that an accused is ‘innocent until proven guilty.' It is not up to the defence to show that he is innocent but the Burden of Proof in a Criminal trial is on the prosecution to make out its case. The defence can technically sit down and do nothing. But Law persons cannot, to date, stand as jurors in Mauritius. Members of the Jury are lay persons. There is a stigma amongst lay persons and the general public that once a person is arrested and charged, he is guilty. If the DPP objects to his bail motion, it sends a signal to the society saying: we’ve got the right man. It is then to wonder whether the principle is not in the eyes of the general public “guilty until proven innocent”. This defeats the whole purpose of the Criminal Justice System which serves not only to find the guilty person but to administer justice. This upside-down notion leads to unfortunate miscarriages of justice and the golden rule from Woolmington v DPP [1935] UKHL 1 as we know it is greatly undermined; as is the accused person’s Right to a Fair trial under Article 6 of the ECHR, equivalent to Section 10 of the Constitution of the Republic of Mauritius. Rights do not end with handcuffs. In an era of Human Rights, should these Rights not be guaranteed under all circumstances?  Here is food for thought Learned friends.

Deena Bhoyroo

LLB 2nd Year, Middlesex University (Mauritius Branch Campus)

Posted in: YOUR VOICE