PM Browne Rejects DPP’s ‘I Owe the Public No Explanation’ Position

PM Browne Questions DPP’s Claim That He Owes Public No Explanation

Prime Minister Gaston Browne has publicly challenged Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Clement Joseph’s assertion that he is under no obligation to explain prosecutorial decisions to the public, warning that such a position could undermine confidence in the justice system.

Responding on social media to remarks made by Joseph in an interview with Observer Media, Browne questioned whether the DPP considered himself beyond public accountability.

“Really Mr DPP? You are El supremo – Beyond reproach? As a public servant, you are not accountable to the public who pays your bill and at whose ultimate discretion and pleasure you serve?” Browne wrote.

The Prime Minister added that he hoped the comments had been misquoted.

“I believe that this reckless statement, which has the potential to erode public confidence and trust in the DPP, is perhaps a misquotation,” Browne stated. “For any avoidance of doubt, no one is above the law and no one is beyond reproach.”

Joseph’s comments came in the wake of criticism surrounding the dismissal of two recent criminal cases by his office.

In the interview, the DPP maintained that the Constitution grants him broad prosecutorial discretion and does not require him to justify individual decisions to the public.

“His constitutional authority does not obligate him to explain the exercise of prosecutorial discretion,” Joseph said, while noting that his decisions may be challenged in court if they are found to be unreasonable or constitute an abuse of authority.

Joseph also questioned whether critics had made any effort to seek clarification directly from his office, suggesting that some commentary had been driven by social media discussions rather than direct engagement.

While acknowledging the importance of transparency, Joseph argued that certain matters must remain confidential and disclosed only on a need-to-know basis. He said he would not breach confidentiality for political purposes or to satisfy public accusations.

The DPP noted that his office provides updates on prosecutorial trends at the start of each law term but maintained that the constitutional framework does not require explanations for individual case decisions.

Attorney-at-law and former Police Commissioner Wendell Alexander has taken a different view, arguing that public confidence in the justice system is strengthened when explanations are provided in cases of significant public interest.

“In the interest of transparency, I would say that the public has a right to know because the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions is a public office,” Alexander said.

He added that where decisions involve matters that have generated widespread public concern, offering an explanation is beneficial to the administration of justice.

Alexander also emphasized that although the DPP enjoys extensive constitutional powers, those powers are not absolute and remain subject to judicial review by the High Court if decisions are considered unreasonable or an abuse of authority.

The exchange has intensified debate over the balance between prosecutorial independence, confidentiality and public accountability in Antigua and Barbuda’s justice system.

Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]