Joseph Patterson et Al v The Attorney General

• Jurisdiction: Jamaica
• Court: Supreme Court (Jamaica)
• Judge: Shelly Williams SPJ,Hutchinson Shelly,Mott-Tulloch Reid, JJ.
• Judgment Date: 16 April 2026
• Year: 2026
• Docket Number: Suit No.: SU2021CV04561

Joseph Patterson et al

and

The Attorney General

JM 2026 SC 27

Shelly Williams, J.; Hutchinson Shelly, J.; Mott-Tullock Reid, J.

Suit No.: SU2021CV04561

Supreme Court

Appearances:

Mr. Hugh Wildman and Mr. Duke Foote instructed by Wildman and Company, for the Claimants.

Ms. Taniesha Rowe-Coke instructed by the Director of State Proceedings for the Defendant.

BACKGROUND

Mott-Tulloch Reid, JJ.

Shelly Williams SPJ, Hutchinson Shelly AND

1 The Claimants filed a Fixed Date Claim Form, accompanied by an affidavit in support, seeking several declarations arising from alleged breaches of their Constitutional Rights. The affidavit of Mr. Joseph Patterson was sworn on behalf of the other three Claimants. He averred that he was the leader of a political movement known as the United Independents Congress (UIC), formed in 2019.

2 Mr. Patterson stated that he was dissatisfied with the Government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic and, as a result, he and other members of UIC held a public march in Mandeville on September 11, 2021. His affidavit further stated that during the march, he spoke with the police and that no objections were raised.

3 Mr. Patterson, along with his followers, decided to undertake another walk on September 22, 2021, in the parish of Kingston. The walk was scheduled to start at the Ward Theatre and end at Gordon House. He testified that the police assaulted several of his members, including the 2nd Claimant, at the Ward Theatre. He also stated that the members continued their walk to Gordon House; however, they were halted by police who had set up barricades along the route. The walk was then cancelled. On the way back from Gordon House, the 4th Claimant was assaulted by police, and the 3rd Claimant was arrested.

4 His affidavit stated that when returning to Ward Theatre, he, Mr. Patterson, was assaulted and put into a police vehicle. He sustained a sprained finger and a twisted foot due to police actions. Later, he was taken to the Central Police Station, where he was charged with violating the Public Order Act and the Disaster Risk Management Act, as well as resisting arrest. While in custody, he also received a summons for breaches of the Disaster Risk Management Act and the Public Order Act related to marches in Mandeville and Kingston.

5 The Claimant filed a Fixed Date Claim Form, which was later amended on the 25 ^th of January 2022. The Amended Fixed Date Claim Form sought the following declarations: -

• 1. A Declaration that section 26(2) of the Disaster Risk Management Act, and the amendments thereunder and thereto, are in conflict with section 20 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011, rendering the said section 26(2) of the Disaster Risk Management Act and the amendments thereunder and thereto, illegal, null and void and of no effect.

• 2. A Declaration that the purported restriction of the Claimants' right to freedom of movement, as guaranteed under section 13(3)(f) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011 by the Defendant, through the amendments and regulations promulgated under section 26(2) of the Disaster Risk Management Act, is illegal, null and void and of no effect.

• 3. A Declaration that the purported restriction of the Claimants' right to freedom of expression, as guaranteed under section 13(3)(e) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011 by the Defendant, through the amendments and regulations promulgated under section 26(2) of the Disaster Risk Management Act, is illegal, null and void and of no effect.

• 4. A Declaration that the purported restriction of the Claimants' right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, as guaranteed under section 13(3)(e) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011 by the Defendant, through the amendments and regulations promulgated under section 26(2) of the Disaster Risk Management Act, is illegal, null and void and of no effect.

• 5. A Declaration that any restriction on the Claimants' right to freedom of movement, as guaranteed under section 13(3)(f) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011 must comply with the provisions of section 49 of the Constitution of Jamaica (“Constitution”).

• 6. A Declaration that any restriction on the Claimants' right to freedom of expression, as guaranteed under section 13(3)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011 must comply with the provisions of section 49 of the Constitution.

• 7. A Declaration that any restriction on the Claimants' right to peaceful assembly and association, as guaranteed under section 13(3)(e) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011 must comply with the provisions of section 49 of the Constitution.

• 8. A Declaration that the provisions of the Disaster Risk Management Act and in particular, section 26(2) and the amendments thereunder and thereto, fail to meet the test of demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society, as the measures enacted under the Disaster Risk Management Act are already provided for under section 20 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011, rendering the said provisions of section 26(2) and the amendments thereunder and thereto, illegal, null and void and of no effect.

• 9. A Declaration that the failure of the Defendant to invoke the provisions of section 20 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011 by having the Governor General proclaim a State of Emergency, in restricting the Claimants' right to freedom of expression, movement and peaceful assembly and association, as guaranteed under section 13(3)(c)(f)(e) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011, renders the measures implemented by the Defendant under section 26(2) of the Disaster Risk Management Act and the amendments thereunder and thereto. illegal, null and void and no effect.

• 10. Declaration that in the absence of a proclamation by the Governor General declaring a State of Emergency under section 20 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011, actions taken by the Executive to control the outbreak of the Covid19 pandemic under section 26(2) of the Disaster Risk Management Act and the amendments thereunder and thereto, are illegal, null and void and of no effect.

• 11. A Declaration that sections 27(1)(b) and 52(b) of the Disaster Risk Management Act are in conflict with section 20 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011, rendering the said sections 27(1)(b) and 52(b) of the Disaster Risk Management Act, illegal, null and void and of no effect.

• 12. A Declaration that section 26(2) of the Disaster Risk Management Act and the amendments thereunder and thereto, breach the Separation of Powers doctrine, which underpins the Constitution, in particular:

  • a. the Act, and the amendments thereunder and thereto, make no reference to the authority of Her Majesty's representative; namely, the Governor General, in the promulgation of orders and/or regulations made pursuant to the Act and the amendments thereunder and thereto.

  • b. make no reference or no provision for the intervention of Her Majesty or the Parliament of Jamaica, in any extension and/or renewal of the provisions of any order and/or regulation under the said Act and the amendments thereunder and thereto, and by focusing on the concentration of power to make such orders and/or regulations in a single Minister under the Act and the amendments thereunder and thereto.

• 13. A Declaration that sections 6 and 12 of the Public Order Act are in conflict with section 13(3)(f) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011, which guarantees the right to freedom of movement, rendering the said sections 6 and 12 of the Public Order Act, illegal, null and void and of no effect.

• 14. A Declaration that section 11(b) of the Public Order Act is in conflict with section 13(3)(f) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011, which guarantees the right to freedom of movement, rendering the said section 11(b) of the Public Order Act, illegal, null and void and of no effect.

• 15. A Declaration that sections 6 and 12 of the Public Order Act fail to meet the test of demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society, and are in breach of section 13(3)(f) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011, which guarantees the right to freedom of movement, rendering the said sections 6 and 12 of the Public Order Act illegal, null and void and of no effect.

• 16. A Declaration that section 11(b) of the Public Order Act fails to meet the test of demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society and is in breach of section 13(3)(f) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011, which guarantees the right to freedom of movement, rendering the said section 11(b) of the Public Order Act illegal. null and void and of no effect.

• 17. An Order striking out section 26(2) of the Disaster Risk Management Act and the amendments thereunder and thereto, as breaching the Constitution aforesaid, and an order for an assessment of damages against the Defendant in favor of the Claimants.

• 18. An Order striking out section 27(1)(b) and 52(b) of the Disaster Risk Management Act and the amendments thereunder and thereto. as breaching the Constitution aforesaid and an order for an assessment of damages against the Defendant in favor of the Claimants.

• 19. An Order striking out section...