Michael Foulkes, Secretary General; Senator Michael Pintard, National Chairman; Dr. Hubert A. Minnis, Opposition Leader; Senator Carl Bethel, and Monique Gomez, President of the Women's Association.​

Nassau, Bahamas - The following is a press statement by the Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. Dr. Hubert Minnis:

Minister Gray’s confession on the front page of the Saturday Nassau Guardian that he had, in fact, telephoned the Island Administrator to give him what amounts to legal advice as to how to discharge his functions as a Judicial Officer is an admission of an extremely serious breach of our Constitutional separation of powers. It is an unconstitutional act and amounts to an interference with the course of justice. It is also an egregious and unacceptable abuse of power!

Minister Gray, when questioned by a reporter in a leading daily, admitted that he called Mayaguana Island Administrator Zephaniah Newbold to merely tell him that he had the power to grant bail when an appeal is lodged to a conviction. The young man who was convicted and sentenced was being held without bail awaiting transportation to Nassau to commence serving the sentence. Surely the Magistrate would have been keenly aware of the options available to him relative to bail and did not need Minister Gray’s legal advice.

The admitted act of the minister sets a dangerous precedent, and sends a terrible message locally and internationally that a Cabinet Minister and member of the Executive has the capacity to instruct a member of the judiciary to take or not take a course of action.

The independence of our judiciary is one of the cornerstones of our democracy and should always be protected. As a senior member of The Bahamas Bar Minister Gray also knows that it is not only important that justice be done it must also be seen to be done.

Immediately following Minister Grays’ intervention the young man was released. The fact is that Minister Gray is NOT a Chief Magistrate, a Supreme Court Judge, nor is he a Justice of Appeal in the Court of Appeal. He has no legal authority to interfere in judicial proceedings in any Court. Such an act of ministerial interference is an apparent breach of the Constitution and the common law.

Furthermore, having admitted his transgression, Mr. Gray compounded his situation by vigorously and shamelessly offering his own version of “evidence” and a bogus interpretation of law as to who may or may not prosecute a case: all based on hearsay.

It is extremely sad that Minister Gray sees nothing wrong with his actions and sought to justify it by claiming that the young man was prosecuted for minor matters such as obscene language or obstruction of a police officer. Furthermore, he asserted that the young man was treated unfairly and suggested that he may have, through the process, been abused by the Magistrate. As a seasoned lawyer Mr. Gray knows full well that in cases where it is perceived that an accused was wrongly or unfairly convicted, a practicing lawyer could advise him and on appeal the case of unfairness could be presented. However, under no circumstances should the Minister have called the Magistrate to pressure him to release the young man, even if he had indicated his intention to appeal.

In fact, Mr. Gray crossed the line in his criticism of the Magistrate in that he alleges dishonourable conduct. Minister Gray’s comment may very well be contemptuous as he appears to be seeking to bring the administration of justice into disrepute. Minister Gray’s contempt is compounded by the fact that he is a member of the Executive Branch of government and has violated the constitutional separation of powers between the executive and the constitutionally independent judiciary.

Mr. Gray spoke an untruth when he initially claimed that he did not call the Magistrate about a particular case but was speaking generally on the law. This kind of duplicity is unbecoming of a Minister of the Government and a member of the Honourable House of Assembley. While we have no ill will toward Mr. Gray and do not relish the thought of the young man being incarcerated, we are duty bound to ensure that the laws are followed and that the Judiciary is never seen to be controlled by the Executive branch of the country.

We specifically assert our view that Mr. Gray has interfered with the course of justice for which he could be liable at common law and under the Contempt of Court jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. We also assert our view that there is potential liability under the Penal Code for using his influence as the Minister responsible for local government to “rescue” the prisoner from custody, by influencing the Magistrate to release the prisoner after the Magistrate was functus officio, having already convicted and sentenced the prisoner.

There is only one remedy, short of a criminal prosecution, for such an admitted and egregious abuse of power, Mr. Gray must resign from Cabinet forthwith or be fired. We call for the immediate resignation of Alfred Gray from Cabinet, failing which we call for his immediate dismissal from all Public Offices. Further we repeat our demand that the Attorney General cause this matter to be immediately and impartially investigated to determine authoritatively whether any law was broken.