The State v Boyce (Trinidad and Tobago)  UKPC 1 (11 January 2006)
Privy Council Appeal No. 51 of 2004
The State Appellant
Brad Boyce Respondent
THE COURT OF APPEAL OF
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
JUDGMENT OF THE LORDS OF THE JUDICIAL
COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL,
Delivered the 11th January 2006
Present at the hearing:-
Lord Bingham of Cornhill
Lord Scott of Foscote
Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
[Delivered by Lord Hoffmann]
"(1) Section 63 notwithstanding, the Director of Public Prosecutions may appeal to the Court of Appeal –
(a) against a judgment or verdict of acquittal of a trial court in proceedings by indictment when the judgment or verdict is the result of a decision by the trial judge to uphold a no case submission or withdraw the case from the jury on any ground of appeal that the decision of the trial judge is erroneous in point of law."
"4. It is hereby recognised and declared that in Trinidad and Tobago there have existed and shall continue to exist, without discrimination by reason of race, origin, colour, religion or sex, the following fundamental human rights and freedoms, namely:
(a) the right of the individual to life, liberty, security of the person and enjoyment of property and the right not to be deprived thereof except by due process of law;
(b) the right of the individual to equality before the law and the protection of the law;…"
"The lack of all specificity in the descriptions of the rights and freedoms protected contained in section  (a) to (k) may make it necessary sometimes to resort to an examination of the law as it was at the commencement of the Constitution in order to determine what limits upon freedoms that are expressed in absolute and unlimited terms were nevertheless intended to be preserved in the interests of the people as a whole and the orderly development of the nation; for the declaration that the rights and freedoms protected by that section already existed at that date may make the existing law as it was then administered in practice a relevant aid to the ascertainment of what kind of executive or judicial act was intended to be prohibited by the wide and vague words used in those paragraphs …"
"Prior to the enactment of the new provisions an accused person who had been acquitted of a charge against him was in a position to regard his liberty as inviolable in respect of the same matter. Indeed he had regained his full freedom and could not be placed in further jeopardy. That was the 'due process' which he enjoyed and … which also constituted protection of the law. That was the legal principle that had come to be well understood in our society. Any law, the effect of which is likely to place the citizen in further jeopardy is a law which offends the due process clause of the Constitution. It deprives the individual of the procedural provisions which were available to him …"
"does not refer to any particular laws and is not a synonym for common law or statute. Rather it invokes the concept of the rule of law itself and the universally accepted standards of justice observed by civilised nations which observe the rule of law … It does not guarantee the particular forms of legal procedure existing when the constitution came into force; the content of the clause is not immutably fixed at that date."
"13(1) An Act to which this section applies may expressly declare that it shall have effect even though inconsistent with sections 4 and 5 and, if any Act does so declare, it shall have effect accordingly unless the Act is shown not to be reasonably justified in a society that has a proper respect for the rights and freedoms of the individual.
(2) An Act to which this section applies is one the Bill for which has been passed by both Houses of Parliament and at the final vote thereon in each House has been supported by the votes of not less than three-fifths of all the members of that House.
54(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, Parliament may alter any of the provisions of this Constitution …
(2) Insofar as it alters … sections 4 to 14 … a Bill for an Act under this section shall not be passed by Parliament unless at the final vote thereon in each House it is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds of all the members of each House."