A High Court ruling delivered on Wednesday dealt another blow to the Antigua and Barbuda Defence Force (ABDF), handing Captain Javonson Willock his third consecutive legal victory against the military institution. According to Antigua News Room, Justice Rene Williams found that the ABDF is statute-barred from initiating any disciplinary proceedings — whether by court martial or summary process — related to allegations of misconduct said to have occurred on August 14, 2020.
The ruling effectively extinguishes any lawful attempt to revive those proceedings. The Court went further, declaring that charges issued against Willock on December 6, 2024, are "unlawful, null, void, and of no effect," invalidating the ABDF's effort to pursue disciplinary action several years after the alleged incident.
However, the Court did not rule in Willock's favour on all counts. His claim for misfeasance in public office was dismissed after the Court found insufficient evidence of loss or material damage to sustain it. The Court also made no order as to costs, meaning both parties will bear their own legal expenses.
Despite the partial setback, Willock indicated he is weighing his options. When asked whether he intends to appeal the dismissal of the misfeasance claim, he said: "I welcome the decision in principle, but I will decide my next course of action after I read and digest the written decision."
Willock elaborated further, stating: "One of the legs of misfeasance in public office is that the defendant must have acted with malice, bad faith, ulterior and/or improper motive. I did not hear the Judge say I failed to establish this leg. And, this, in my humble view, is quite telling."
The case was not without its share of controversy. During proceedings, Willock filed an application seeking the recusal of Justice Williams on grounds of apparent bias — an application he later withdrew, allowing the Judge to continue presiding over the matter.
In a notable development, the Court rebuked the ABDF and placed on record that it had brought the administration of justice into disrepute. This followed findings that incorrect information had been presented to the Court by Lieutenant Colonel Alando Michael, including representations that a key witness was in China and therefore unavailable for cross-examination. That information was later proven to be inaccurate after Willock raised the alarm.
Throughout the entire proceedings, Willock represented himself without legal counsel, while the ABDF was represented by a team of attorneys from the Office of the Attorney General alongside in-house legal representatives.
