Court Ruling in UWP Case Reveals Deep Flaws in Dominica’s Justice System

1 When Justice Becomes a Political Tool

The incitement charges stemmed from a February 2017 UWP protest that called for the resignation of Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit amid allegations of corruption related to Dominica’s Citizenship by Investment (CBI) programme. When minor incidents of property damage occurred after the protest ended, the State pounced, charging UWP leaders with incitement to violence.

However, court transcripts, case files, and eyewitness reports paint a far different picture—one in which law enforcement already had a pre-drafted case targeting opposition figures, regardless of actual evidence linking them directly to the acts of vandalism. This method, known globally as “lawfare,” is a common tactic in regimes with weak judicial independence. It involves using the courts not for justice but to punish political opponents.

2 The Long Game of Legal Harassment

Justice Colin Williams’s decision to permanently halt the case is grounded in a straightforward reality—justice delayed is justice denied. After eight years, a trial was never held, no meaningful evidence was presented, and no clear case remained. However, what persisted was the tangible impact of the charges themselves: financial strain, public character assassination, and a deliberate distraction for the UWP leadership, particularly during election cycles.

It is no secret that Dominica’s courts have faced allegations of political interference before. In 2022, Freedom House, which assesses global democracy, flagged Dominica’s political environment, where state institutions are sometimes co-opted for political gain. Opposition parties, civil society groups, and international observers have frequently noted the slow pace of politically sensitive cases, which contrasts sharply with the speed at which the state moves against ordinary citizens.

3 Historical Context: A Pattern Repeated

This case was not isolated. Observers may recall the 2009 incident where journalist and political activist Matt Peltier was sued for defamation by a senior government official after his radio show exposed alleged corruption. Similarly, opposition-aligned radio stations have faced questionable legal actions over the years, often accused of “disrupting public order”—a conveniently vague charge.

The cumulative evidence paints a worrying pattern: if you challenge the government publicly, you risk legal entanglement—a tactic more akin to authoritarian states than a Caribbean democracy. This recent ruling, therefore, is not just about the UWP; it is about whether dissent is still tolerated in Dominica.

4 A Judiciary Under Pressure

Behind the scenes, legal sources reveal that judicial officers face pressure when handling cases involving opposition figures. Speaking off the record, several past judges acknowledged “political overreach” as a reality they have learned to navigate. Justice Williams dismissing the case so decisively suggests that even within the judicial ranks, there is growing frustration with the misuse of courtrooms for political ends.

This is a rare but necessary rebuke. It sends a message—not only to the government but also to the legal fraternity—that the courts must not be used as an extension of political power.

5 Electoral Reform and the Stench of Judicial Abuse

For the UWP, this ruling also validates their long-standing demand for comprehensive electoral reform. If the courts can be manipulated, what guarantees exist that the electoral office is free from the same hands? The opposition has repeatedly highlighted Dominica’s outdated voters’ list, allegations of vote buying, and the controversial use of state resources during elections.

While the recent Sir Dennis Byron electoral reform recommendations have been welcomed, they have yet to be fully implemented. Opposition leaders argue that the delays in electoral reform are intentional, calculated, and politically motivated, mirroring the delays in their court cases.

6 The Human Cost: Silencing Opposition through Intimidation

While the legal arguments dominate headlines, the personal toll on the accused cannot be ignored. Dr. Thomson Fontaine, who has since relocated to South Sudan for work, repeatedly expressed frustration at being unable to fully contribute to Dominica’s political discourse while under the cloud of prosecution. Though professional, his exile was partly forced by a toxic political environment at home.

Similarly, Lennox Linton, a vocal and relentless critic of the Skerrit administration, has endured years of character assassination linked directly to this case. In a small society like Dominica, being labeled as a criminal before any trial is a punishment.

7 Public Opinion: A Test of Maturity

While the judiciary corrected course, the public response has been mixed. Government supporters, fueled by state-aligned media narratives, remain convinced that the UWP leaders were somehow responsible for the 2017 unrest. However, this case reinforced the dangers of unchecked state power for a growing segment of civil society—especially young voters.

In 2023, the Caribbean Policy Research Institute (CaPRI) conducted a youth governance survey across the OECS. The survey found that 58% of Dominica’s youth believed the courts were influenced by politics—one of the highest rates in the region. This perception must change for Dominica’s democracy to thrive.

8 The DPP’s Role: An Office in Crisis

The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), tasked with upholding the law independently, emerges from this case with serious credibility issues. Critics argue that the DPP’s persistence in pursuing a flimsy case reveals political pressure or personal bias.

It is worth noting that in 2020, when a similar politically charged case collapsed after years of stagnation, the DPP’s office faced calls for reform—calls that went unanswered. With this latest ruling, those calls are louder than ever.

9 What Happens Next?

For the UWP, this ruling serves as both vindication and ammunition. It bolsters their argument that Dominica’s democratic institutions are under threat and revitalises their electoral reform campaign.

For the government, the ruling is a blow to public relations, but they will likely portray it as a technical defeat rather than a revelation of systemic abuse.

For Dominicans, however, the real story is bigger than either party. This case concerns whether the rule of law still applies in Dominica and whether dissenters are free to challenge power without fear of prolonged legal harassment.

10 A Defining Moment for Democracy

As the 2025 elections approach, Dominicans must decide whether they want a political culture in which the courts serve justice or politics. The ruling in favor of UWP leaders offers a glimmer of hope but underscores how fragile that hope remains.

The world is watching, and so are Dominica’s next generation of leaders. If this case teaches anything, it is that justice must never be optional, and no government should feel comfortable using the courts as a weapon.

Because when justice bends to politics, democracy breaks.