In a landmark 30-page judgment delivered this week, Trinidad and Tobago’s High Court has overturned an unlawful order by a senior magistrate that saw an unrepresented father wrongfully detained at a state psychiatric hospital amid a civil child custody dispute. The ruling, penned by Justice Marcia Ayers-Caesar, exposes serious violations of constitutional rights and improper application of mental health law by a lower court judge, setting a new precedent for procedural safeguards in civil court proceedings.
The case dates back to February 17, 2020, when the unnamed man appeared at the Point Fortin Magistrates’ Court for a hearing focused on paternity, child maintenance, and custody of his infant son. Tensions between the man and his son’s mother had created communication barriers, and a social worker had previously suggested he complete a voluntary psychiatric assessment as part of joint co-parenting counseling. No involuntary evaluation had been ordered at that stage of the proceedings.
During the hearing, Senior Magistrate Alicia Chankar observed the man fidgeting and pressing his hands to his forehead, and labeled his behavior “erratic and concerning.” Acting on this observation, Chankar invoked Section 13 of the country’s Mental Health Act to order a 14-day involuntary remand to St Ann’s Psychiatric Hospital for psychiatric evaluation. Justice Ayers-Caesar’s ruling makes clear that this application of the law was fundamentally incorrect: Section 13 is a legal provision designed exclusively for individuals facing criminal charges, not parties in civil custody disputes.
In her written judgment, Ayers-Caesan emphasized that the magistrate had improperly redefined a tool intended for social support into a weapon of state authority over a private civil matter. Two independent psychiatrists later confirmed that the man’s outward nervousness was nothing more than a reaction to the stress of participating in a high-stakes court proceeding, not evidence of underlying mental illness.
What followed the remand order was a sequence of degrading and unconstitutional treatment, the court found. After being handcuffed in the courtroom, the man was transferred to the Point Fortin Police Station, where officers subjected him to a forced strip search, verbally taunted him, and locked him in a cell with human feces smeared across the walls and floor alongside two other detainees. Approximately four hours later, he was restrained at his hands, waist, and ankles before being transported to St Ann’s Forensic Psychiatric Unit, Ward 27. Once admitted, he was held in unsanitary conditions alongside patients with severe acute psychiatric conditions, with broken toilets and non-functional showers in his living area.
In total, the man spent 92 hours in involuntary detention before two consulting psychiatrists, Dr Dominic O Nwokolo and Dr Keshenee Ramnarine, cleared him of any mental illness or psychiatric disorder and authorized his release on February 21, 2020. The High Court found that throughout the entire process, the man was denied every basic safeguard of due process: he received no advance notice that the magistrate was considering involuntary committal, had no opportunity to contest the order before it was issued, and was already proceeding without legal representation at the civil hearing.
Ayers-Caesar wrote that the mistreatment the man endured qualified as “grossly disproportionate, humiliating, degrading, and cruel”, and violated his constitutional protections against cruel and unusual punishment. The man has alleged that the unlawful detention and associated record caused lasting harm to his personal reputation and ability to secure steady employment.
The High Court formally ruled that the original committal order was unlawful, unconstitutional, and void from the moment it was issued, and ordered the state to cover all of the man’s legal costs related to the constitutional claim. The case has been adjourned until November 10, when a virtual hearing will be held to assess the full amount of compensatory, aggravated, exemplary, and vindicatory damages that the state is required to pay to the wrongfully detained man. Attorney Ted Roopnarine represented the claimant, while attorneys Keisha Prosper and Tenelle Hills appeared on behalf of the Office of the Attorney General, the named defendant in the constitutional claim.