Oct 17, 2026
3 min read
The Women and Gender Equality Commission is questioning how Daniel Seeram’s remand was handled, warning that the case could weaken survivors’ confidence in the justice system.
Seeram, the National Border Patrol Director and former Region Four Chairman, was convicted of assault causing actual bodily harm against his former spouse following a trial before Magistrate Abigail Gibbs.
He was ordered remanded to prison pending sentencing, scheduled for November 2. However, his detention became the subject of public scrutiny after questions emerged about the execution of that order.
The Commission has criticised the handling of the case, arguing that it risks weakening years of efforts to encourage women and other victims of domestic violence to report abuse and trust state institutions to respond.
“It is no wonder that the public and persons who are victims of abuse do not believe they can expect a just outcome, especially when the perpetrator holds a position of power or is perceived to retain the backing of the powerful,” the Commission said.
Questions over the remand
Seeram’s attorney, Nigel Hughes, challenged the magistrate’s decision to remand his client before sentencing, arguing that it effectively imposed imprisonment before the court had considered the probation report, victim impact statement and submissions on aggravating and mitigating circumstances.
The defence sought judicial review of the decision in the High Court.
On October 5, Justice Joy Persaud-Singh dismissed the application, finding no basis to conclude that the magistrate had acted unlawfully, irrationally or outside her jurisdiction. The ruling upheld the decision to keep Seeram in custody pending sentencing.
During the proceedings, Deputy Solicitor General Shoshana Lall agreed with the defence that Section 9 of the Bail Act was not applicable to the circumstances. However, she maintained that this did not justify the High Court interfering with the magistrate’s decision.
The Commission also questioned the State’s position during the proceedings, arguing that the handling of the case could reinforce perceptions that justice is not applied equally.
Transfer to prison confirmed
The execution of the remand order drew further scrutiny after Seeram was not immediately transferred to prison following the High Court’s ruling.
The Guyana Prison Service subsequently confirmed that he was transferred to the Camp Street prison on October 9.
The Commission has called on the relevant agencies to explain their actions, maintaining that the treatment of cases involving domestic violence has implications for public confidence in the justice system.
Seeram appeals conviction
On October 16, Seeram filed an appeal against his conviction and the decision to remand him pending sentencing.
Through Hughes, he is asking the Court of Appeal to overturn the magistrate’s ruling and grant him bail while he awaits sentencing.
The appeal challenges aspects of the magistrate’s assessment of the evidence and her decision to keep him in custody. These are arguments advanced by the defence and have not been determined by the appellate court.
Seeram remains scheduled to be sentenced on November 2.
The Commission’s concerns centre on the wider implications of the case, particularly whether victims of domestic violence can have confidence that their complaints will be treated seriously and the law applied consistently, regardless of a person’s position or influence.
