Businessman refused leave to go to Judicial Review Court over revoked gun permit

A St Catherine businessman has been denied leave to go to the Judicial Review Court to get orders to quash the decision by the Firearm Licensing Authority (FLA) to revoke his gun permit in 2020.

He was seeking declarations that the failure of the Review Board to hear and determine his appeal within the 90 days stipulated by the Firearms Act was illegal.

He complained in his claim filed in the Supreme Court on September 6, 2022 that 13 months had elapsed since he filed his application with the review board and there was no response from the board or the minister of national security.

He was also seeking orders that the minister of national security failed to ensure that his appeal was heard within 90 days.

The businessman said it was when he went to the FLA in May 2021 to renew the licence that he was informed that it was revoked in July 2020 on the basis that he was “no longer considered fit and proper to retain a firearm licence”.

He said in his affidavit that he was charged twice with breaches of the Firearms Act but he was acquitted. He said in one instance he was accused of hitting someone in the face with his firearm and was charged with illegal possession of firearm, but the incident never occurred.

The FLA outlined in court documents that it conducted investigations and received intelligence regarding the charges against the businessman in January 2017.  It found that he was discharged because the witness had died and in the other case the witness did not attend court.

An affidavit from a witness for the FLA stated that the investigations revealed that the applicant exhibited violent tendencies on multiple occasions and did not appear to handle conflicts in a proper manner. It was based on those findings that the board of the FLA took the decision to revoke the licence, the witness stated.

Attorney-at-law Alana Wanliss who represented the FLA and Director of State Proceedings, Faith Hall, who represented the minister, submitted that when the review board failed to act, the claimant in accordance with the Firearm Act should have brought the matter to the attention of the minister.

The attorneys said the applicant did not exhaust all the remedies available to him before going to court.

Justice Andrea Pettigrew Collins ruled last month that the applicant did not put forward any ground which formed the basis of an arguable case with a realistic prospect of success. The judge said the claimant did not avail himself of the alternative remedy before approaching the court.

Attorney-at-law Hugh Wildman, who is representing the claimant, said today that the judge has given the businessman leave to appeal her decision.

-Barbara Gayle

Follow The Gleaner on Twitter and Instagram @JamaicaGleaner and on Facebook @GleanerJamaica. Send us a message on WhatsApp at 1-876-499-0169 or email us at onlinefeedback@gleanerjm.com or editors@gleanerjm.com.