Connect with us

News

NEW LAW: CONTEMPT OF COURT ON COURT REPORTING

Published

on

Turks and Caicos, December 3, 2024

 

CONTEMPT OF COURT RULES 2024 

(Legal Notice 61 of 2024) MADE by the Chief Justice under section 4 of the Chief Justice (Responsibilities) Ordinance, with the approval of the President of the Court of Appeal.

These Rules may be cited as the Contempt of Court Rules 2024 and shall come into operation on 2 December 2024.

In these Rules— “contempt of Court” means any conduct, whether committed in the face of the Court or not, that substantially obstructs or interferes or prejudices, tends to substantially obstruct or interfere or prejudice, the administration of justice in any proceeding pending before the Court, or brings the administration of justice into disrepute; “Court” means the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court; “publication” includes any speech, writing, broadcast, or other communication in whatever form which is addressed to the public at large or to any section of the public; and “publish” means to make available to the public or any section of the public, any information whether orally, by print or electronic means or otherwise.

Outline of contempt of Court – The following shall constitute contempt of Court— 

(a) disobedience of court orders;

(b) interference with Court Proceedings and unauthorised recording; and

(c) prejudicial publications.

Disobedience of court orders – It shall be a contempt of Court— 

(a) to willfully disobey or disregard, any judgment, decree, direction or order of a Court; or

(b) to willfully breach an undertaking given to a Court. Interference with Court proceedings and unauthorised recording

It shall be a contempt of Court— 

(a) to use in Court, or bring into Court for use, any tape recorder or other instrument for recording sound and or images, except with the leave of the Court;

(b) to publish a recording of legal proceedings made by means of any such instrument, or any recording derived directly or indirectly from it, by playing it in the hearing and sight of the public or any section of the public, or to dispose of it or any recording so derived, with a view to such publication;

(c) to use any such recording in contravention of any conditions of leave granted under paragraph (a); or

(d) to obtain or attempt to obtain or disclose any statement made, opinions expressed, arguments advanced or votes cast by members of the jury in the course of their deliberations in any criminal proceedings.

Prejudicial publications 6 – It shall be a contempt of Court— 

(a) to publish any matter which creates a substantial risk that the course of justice in the proceedings in question will be seriously impeded, affected, or prejudiced; or

(b) to publish any matter to the public at large or any section of the public that may interfere or tend to interfere with the course of justice in particular legal proceedings regardless of the intent to do so, save where at the time of such publication such a person did not know, or did not have any reasonable grounds for suspecting that the relevant proceedings were pending before the Court.

(2) A person shall not be guilty of or punishable for contempt of Court for the distribution of a publication which would otherwise be contempt of court, if at the time of distribution, he did not know, or did not have any reasonable grounds for suspecting that the publication contained, or was likely to contain any matter which amounts to contempt of Court.

(3) A person is not guilty of contempt of Court if he distributes a publication containing any matter pending before the Court, if at the time of distribution, having taken all reasonable care, he does not know that it contains such matter and has no reason to suspect that it is likely to do so.

(4) The burden of proof of any fact tending to establish a defence under subrule (2) or (3) lies upon the person who so asserts, on a balance of the probabilities.

(5) A person is not guilty of contempt of Court for refusing to disclose the source of information contained in a publication for which he is responsible, unless it be established to the satisfaction of the Court that disclosure is necessary in the interests of justice or national security or for the prevention of disorder or crime.

 Ex facie curiae 

A person shall be guilty of the offence of contempt of court in the face of the court for any of the following—

(a) any insult or disrespect offered to a Court;

(b) the interruption of proceedings pending before a Court;

(c) the use of abusive or threatening language;

(d) the use of violence or threatening the use of violence;

(e) any act calculated to scandalize or lower the authority of a Court;

(f) failure to attend Court without good and sufficient reason; or

(g) any other act or conduct that disrupts the due course of any proceedings before a Court.

 Mode of trial  

(1) Contempt of Court may be tried upon indictment or dealt with summarily by the Supreme Court.

(2) Unless the Court decides to try the alleged contemnor summarily, the Director of Prosecutions must be notified of every referral to the Supreme Court for committal proceedings, for his action. Summary procedure for committal

(1) A Court dealing with an allegation of contempt of Court shall try an alleged contemnor summarily only where it is satisfied that such a course will preserve the integrity of the trial or the dignity of the court.

 (2) Where it is alleged, or appears to the Court on its own view, that a person is guilty of contempt of Court in— 

(a) the disobedience of a court order;

(b) through prejudicial publication;

(c) contemptuous conduct displayed in the face of the Court,

(d) contemptuous conduct done in the hearing of the Court, the Court may— (i) by oral order direct that the contemnor be brought before the Court; or (ii) issue a warrant for the arrest of the contemnor.

 (3) Where the contemnor is brought before the Court, the Court shall— 

(a) cause the contemnor to be informed orally of the contempt with which he or she is charged, and be allowed reasonable time to obtain legal representation and advice;

(b) require the contemnor to enter a plea and make his defence to the charge;

(c) after hearing the contemnor, determine the matter; and

(d) make an order for the punishment or discharge of the contemnor.

 (4) The Court may, pending disposal of the charge— 

(a) direct that the contemnor be kept in custody as the Court may determine; or

(b) direct that the contemnor be released, and such a direction is sufficient authority for the contemnor to be kept in custody or released, as the case may be. 5 Punishment

(1) A person who commits a contempt of Court shall be guilty of an offence, and is punishable by a term of imprisonment or a fine.

(2) The committal shall, without prejudice to the power of the Court to order his earlier discharge, be for a fixed term not exceeding two years.

(3) Where a court imposes a fine for the punishment of contempt of Court, the Court shall order that the fine be paid within a definit

Judge’s court wig and hammer or gavel

e time, but no less than seven days, after the date of the order.

(4) The payment of a fine imposed as punishment for a contempt of Court shall be enforced upon the order of the Court as if the order were a judgment or order for the payment of money. (5) The Court may in addition to any sanction it may impose, order any instrument used in unauthorised recording, or any such recording made with it, or both, to be forfeited, and any instrument or recording so forfeited shall be disposed of or dealt with in such manner as the Court may direct subject to the owners right to be heard as to reason why such instrument or recording shall not be forfeited.

(6) Where the contemnor is a company, and the contempt is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance, or is attributable to the reckless conduct or act on the part of, any director, manager of or any other person in charge of or responsible for the conduct of the business of the company, that person shall also be deemed to be guilty of contempt of Court. (7) In pursuance of subrule (6), a person shall not be deemed to be guilty of contempt of Court if he proves that the contempt was committed without his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence to prevent its commission.

(8) At all times and in all circumstances, it shall be open to the Court to require an apology or, a retraction from a contemnor without recording a conviction.

(9) The Court may also issue a reprimand or a warning, and the disregard of the reprimand or warning may lead to an imposition of a fine or a term of imprisonment.

MADE this 21st day of November 2024.

Continue Reading

News

Experience Turks and Caicos and Statistics Authority Publish Latest Visitor Exit Survey Report    

Published

on

Providenciales, Turks and Caicos Islands (June 16th, 2026) — Experience Turks and Caicos, in collaboration with the Statistics Authority, has announced the completion and publication of the latest Visitor Exit Survey Report, providing enhanced insights into visitor behaviour, spending patterns and overall travel experiences in the Turks and Caicos Islands.

The Visitor Exit Survey is a joint initiative designed to better understand the characteristics of visitors to the destination, including their travel motivations, length of stay, expenditure, satisfaction levels and perceptions of the Turks and Caicos Islands as a tourism destination.

While exit surveys have been conducted in previous years, this latest publication marks a significant enhancement in the way tourism data is collected and shared. It introduces a new quarterly reporting framework, with surveys conducted at the end of each quarter and findings published on a more frequent basis throughout the year.

This improved reporting cycle is intended to provide more timely and actionable insights to support tourism planning, policy development, marketing strategy formulation and broader industry decision-making.

“The Statistics Authority is pleased to partner with Experience Turks and Caicos on the Visitor Exit Survey program,” said Mr. Shirlen Forbes, Director. “As tourism remains the cornerstone of our economy, reliable and timely data is essential for understanding visitor behaviour, measuring tourism’s economic impact and supporting informed decision-making. We value our ongoing collaboration with Experience Turks and Caicos and believe these quarterly reports will provide stakeholders with valuable insights to help guide the future growth and development of the industry.”

Miss Sharissa Lightbourne, Marketing Intelligence Manager of Experience Turks and Caicos, noted that the expanded approach will allow government and industry stakeholders to better track trends in visitor behaviour and assess the economic contribution of tourism beyond traditional arrival statistics.

“Data is the foundation of informed decision-making and plays a critical role in shaping the future of our tourism industry. The insights contained in this report provide a deeper understanding of who our visitors are, how they experience the destination, and how they engage with our tourism product. This information is invaluable to our hotel partners, service providers, investors and other stakeholders as they refine their business strategies, enhance the visitor experience and identify new opportunities for growth. I would like to thank the Statistics Authority for its continued collaboration and commitment to strengthening tourism intelligence in the Turks and Caicos Islands. I encourage everyone in the industry to download the report and explore the valuable insights it contains,” she said.

The findings will also support more targeted destination marketing efforts, improved visitor experience initiatives and more informed investment decisions across the tourism sector.

Experience Turks and Caicos and the Statistics Authority reaffirm their commitment to strengthening tourism intelligence and ensuring that stakeholders across the industry have access to reliable, timely and relevant data.

Download the report here: https://issuu.com/myexperiencetci/docs/tci_departing_visitor_survey_report_q1_2026

Continue Reading

News

DDME LAUNCHES 2026 ATLANTIC HURRICANE SEASON WITH CHURCH VISITS

Published

on

Providenciales, Turks and Caicos Islands – Tuesday, 16 June 2026: The Department of Disaster Management and Emergencies (DDME) has officially commenced the 2026 Atlantic Hurricane Season with a series of church visits spanning the length and breadth of the Turks and Caicos Islands, underscoring the department’s commitment to reaching every community through fellowship and preparedness.

The initiative, began on Sunday, 31st May 2026, at Providence Baptist Church on the island of North Caicos. Greetings were brought on behalf of DDME by Ms. Andrea Clare, Community Preparedness Officer for North Caicos.

On Sunday, 7th June 2026, the team worshipped at Abundant Life Ministries Int’l on Providenciales. The Director for DDME, Lt Col (Ret’d) Jason Hills brought greetings on behalf of the department, while Ms. Bernadya Smith, Public Information and Media Manager administered a scripture reading.

Mt. Olivet Baptist Church in South Caicos was the team’s third visit, taking place on Sunday, 14 June 2026. Director Hills brought greetings to the congregation, a scripture reading was read by Ms. Yolande Williams, Community Preparedness Officer for South Caicos and the congregation was ministered through song by Ms. Tamara Hylton, Training and Education Manager.

While addressing the congregations, Director Hills stated, “At DDME we will do our part. We will track the storms, share the alerts and open the shelters when needed. But the truth is the first responders are right here in this room. You are the ones who take food to your neighbours, who pray when the winds rise. You are the ones who help TCI recover every time. So, this season, let us commit together. Let’s be ready for any storm. Not just in June but all season long. Not just with batteries and water but also with faith and community.”

Throughout the month of June, DDME will continue visiting churches across the islands to formally acknowledge the start of the 2026 Atlantic hurricane season and to engage residents at the community level. These services are more than a formality, they are an opportunity for our communities to come together in faith and to be reminded that preparedness is a shared responsibility that begins long before a storm appears on the horizon.

The public is warmly encouraged to attend upcoming services and DDME Initiatives to take an active role in hurricane awareness and family preparedness. Upcoming event schedule is as follows:

UPCOMING CHURCH SERVICES

Sunday, 21 June 2026 • Church of God of Prophecy, Conch Bar, Middle Caicos | 11:00 AM

Sunday, 28 June 2026 • St. Mary’s Pro-Cathedral, Grand Turk | 8:30 AM

OTHER UPCOMING HURRICANE SEASON INITIATIVES

Hurricane Preparedness Expo, Grand Turk Dillon Hall – Friday, 19 June 2026| 10:00 am – 2:00

Community Hurricane Scavenger Hunt, Providenciales – 4 July 2026 | Time: TBA

Families are reminded to review their emergency plans, assemble disaster supply kits and stay informed through official channels. For more information on hurricane preparedness and to stay up to date on upcoming events, please follow our official social media pages.

 

Instagram: ddme.tci_official

Facebook / X/ YouTube: DDME TCI

Continue Reading

News

The Cost of Unprotected Culture

Published

on

“Where are the local artists?”, This question is not simply about visibility. It’s about structure and law. And more precisely, it is about whether Turks and Caicos has fully come to terms with what it means to exist within the global framework of intellectual property while still failing to execute it locally. The absence of local artists in major developments is not an accident of taste. It is the predictable outcome of a system that recognizes rights in theory but struggles to enforce them in practice.

When culture is reduced to atmosphere, the people who produce it are reduced to suppliers as with the business license structure and how cultural creators are categorized as retail entities which further support this framework. Their work becomes interchangeable with references and motifs. Their intellectual property becomes negotiable.

At the centre of this is the Berne Convention (1886) for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works.

Protection..But, Not Really

On paper, Turks and Caicos benefits from international copyright protections through its constitutional relationship with the UK. The Berne Convention guarantees that creators (authors, musicians, painters, photographers, sculptors, filmmakers etc). automatically own rights to their work without formal registration, that sounds modern.

But the reality is; the only operative copyright framework materially available to artists in Turks and Caicos remains the Copyright Act 1911. A law written for a different century, drafted before digital reproduction and predates the very economy that uses art as a commercial asset. So while the convention exists as an international standard, the local mechanism through which an artist must assert and defend their rights is effectively anchored in the 1911 act, while the Brene convention was revised in 1971.

Regional Contrast

Countries such as Bermuda and The Bahamas have moved beyond inherited frameworks and enacted modern copyright legislation that gives real effect to the Berne Convention within their domestic systems. They have updated copyright laws aligned with contemporary use, enacted clearer enforcement pathways, provided legal recognition of digital and commercial reproduction and have systems that better position artists within the economic structure.

In other words, they have translated the Convention from principle into practice.

The Berene Convention

The Berne Convention establishes three core principles:

  • automatic protection
  • national treatment
  • minimum standards for rights

But none of these principles enforce themselves. They require local systems to give them force, what exists is not a functioning copyright ecosystem. It is a legal inheritance.

There is:

  • no modern, locally tailored copyright regime
  • no structured licensing or royalty collection systems
  • limited institutional pathways for enforcement
  • and a heavy reliance on outdated legal provisions to address contemporary commercial use

In this context, the Convention becomes theoretical; while artists are left to operate within a system that has not caught up.

A Cultural Economy Being Built on Outdated Law

Turks and Caicos is not lacking in the arts. It is lacking in legal infrastructure that treats art as an economic asset in real time. The reliance on the 1911 Copyright Act produces a specific set of conditions:

  • reproduction rights are often misunderstood or ignored
  • commercial use of artwork in marketing exists in a grey zone until challenged
  • enforcement becomes expensive, slow, and reactive
  • artists must carry the burden of asserting rights that should already be structurally protected

So when developments ask for culture, what they are often engaging with is not a regulated market, but an unsecured one.

Tourism, Aesthetics, and Unregulated Value

The Turks and Caicos Islands sells an image of place. That image is not just beaches and water. It is culture, even if some persons may not agree, it is identity and visual language.

Arts sit inside this concept with a contradiction: culture is used to increase property value, brand identity, and global appeal. Yet the legal system governing that culture remains outdated and under-enforced. This creates an environme nt where art can be absorbed into commercial projects without clear frameworks, artists are treated as aesthetic contributors rather than rights holders and value flows outward without structured returns.

Not because the Berne Convention allows it, but because the local system fails to prevent it.

The Berne Convention assumes a baseline: that authorship will be respected. But in jurisdictions where: legal literacy is uneven, enforcement mechanisms are weak and power imbalances are significant, that assumption collapses. What remains is a gap between what the law says could be possible (by extension as a UK terittory) and what artists can realistically enforce. That gap is filled by the continued reliance on a 1911 statute to manage 21st-century commercial realities.

Artists’ Rights

The conversation cannot stop at inclusion. It must move to ownership and enforcement. If Turks and Caicos is serious and wishes to further expand its economic sectors via the creative economy; its reliance on the Copyright Act 1911 is no longer sufficient. A modern legal framework is required to address digital use, marketing reproduction, and commercial exploitation of work.

  1. Institutional Development
    Systems must exist to support licensing, rights management, and dispute resolution that are accessible to local artists.
  2. Developer Responsibility
    Cultural due diligence must become standard practice. Intellectual property cannot remain an afterthought in projects that rely on cultural branding.
  3. Repositioning the Artist
    Artists must be recognised not as optional additions, but as rights holders whose work carries enforceable economic value.

To support local culture is not to decorate with it. It is to protect it, regulate it, and ensure that those who produce it participate in the value it generates. Right now, Turks and Caicos exists in a contradiction that anchors it to a 1911 legal framework without significant revision. Until that is resolved, the system will continue to produce the same outcome and so the question is no longer just: “Where are the local artists?” but;

“What legal system has been built for artists to stand on?”

Because without that system, the Berne Convention remains what it currently is in Turks and Caicos:

A principle without power.

PHOTO CAPTION:  1 Brass Manilla, artwork from the Tears of the Trouvadore series)

Continue Reading

FIND US ON FACEBOOK

TRENDING