The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London has reserved its judgment following a Tuesday hearing on a major constitutional challenge to Trinidad and Tobago’s 2011 State of Emergency (SoE).

The impending judgment could define the legal boundaries of the current 2026 State of Emergency (SoE) in Trinidad and Tobago, which was declared on March 3, 2026, and subsequently extended to September.

Trinidad and Tobago’s highest court is tasked with deciding three critical questions: whether the President’s original proclamation declaring the 2011 SoE was unconstitutional; whether the emergency regulations themselves were legally justified; and whether the specific arrests and detentions of the appellants, Earl Elie, Dominic Pitilal, and Ashmeed Mohammed—including claims that they were denied access to a lawyer—were unlawful.

Elie, who is now an Assistant Commissioner of Police, was a sergeant when he was detained, and even though he (and the co-appellants) won a TT$100,000 award in the Court of Appeal in Port of Spain, the decision was challenged by the State.

Background:

On August 21, 2011, the President of Trinidad and Tobago, Prof. Max Richards, by Proclamation No. 8 of 2011, declared that a state of public emergency existed in Trinidad and Tobago. The President had acted on the advice of the Cabinet, the members of which had debated the issue and concluded that the declaration of a state of emergency was the correct step to take.

At the time, Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar told Parliament: “The entire nation has been rocked with the recent tragic news of the spate of murders over the past few days. The situation has reached proportions which the Government must respond to in the most definitive manner possible.”

She further stated: “I am advised that one of the causes for the spike in murders is, ironically, linked to the success by the police in the discovery of large drug hauls with values in excess of twenty million dollars in just one raid. These large sums of money simply do not disappear from the drug trade without consequences and, in some of the cases now occurring, this is the result.”

What’s at Stake:

The Privy Council, in this case, must rule on whether a generalized crime spike or gang network is constitutionally sufficient to trigger an SoE.

The 2026 SoE was based on the emergence of a highly threatening criminal network operating both within and outside of Trinidad and Tobago’s prisons and was reported to be targeting senior government officials, national institutions, and influencing gang violence, which is similar to the reasons set out for the 2011 SoE.

The Privy Council ruling will also establish the scope for detention without warrants.

As it stands, under the 2026 Emergency Powers Regulations, security forces hold sweeping authority to search, arrest, and detain suspects using Preventive Detention Orders (PDOs).

The Privy Council will clarify exactly what level of “requisite suspicion” a police officer must possess to hold a citizen under emergency rules.

Depending on the judgment, the State may face a financial burden.

For example, the Trinidad and Tobago Court of Appeal originally awarded Earl Elie TT$100,000 in damages for his unlawful arrest during the 2011 SoE.

If that decision is upheld, there are hundreds of individuals currently detained under preventive detention orders, which could trigger a flood of lawsuits against the State.

The case, Earl Elie v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago, was heard on July 14, 2026, and the final decision is currently awaiting judgment.

The judges are Lord Reed, Lord Hamblen, Lord Leggatt, Lady Rose, and Lord Doherty.

A formal written ruling outlining the decision will be released by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on a date to be announced.