Lawyer Charles Richardson has launched a constitutional challenge after being accused of libelling a policeman on Facebook.The 39-year-old claims the charge he faces of criminal defamation breaches his constitutional right to freedom of expression.His attorney Craig Attridge successfully applied at Magistrates' Court yesterday for the issue to be referred to the Supreme Court and for his trial to be delayed until it is resolved.Experts say the matter may prove a legal test case for Bermuda and could ultimately lead to the removal of defamation from the Criminal Code.Constitutional lawyer Tim Marshall said: “The Constitution is the supreme law of Bermuda so he's well within his rights to advance a constitutional challenge and to argue that the provisions in the Criminal Code are unreasonable under the Constitution, as interpreted in 2011.”Mr Marshall said prosecutions for criminal defamation were a “rare event” and it was more usual for libel to be dealt with in the civil courts.“That having been said, it's still on the books. It's still the law of the land until it is found to be unconstitutional or if it is repealed.”Mr Richardson said last week he believed no one in Bermuda had been charged with criminal defamation for more than 75 years, though The Royal Gazette's former editor David White and a senior journalist were accused of the offence in 1982.That is believed to be the last time the charge was brought against anyone here.Mr White said in a speech to Hamilton Lions in 1995 that Bermuda's criminal libel laws were used to keep the media in line and curtailed the press in its role as a watchdog of government. In the UK, all forms of criminal libel were abolished last year.Mr Attridge told Senior Magistrate Archibald Warner yesterday that the charge contravened his client's right to freedom of expression, which includes the right to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.He asked Mr Warner to refer the following two questions to the Supreme Court:l Does part 12 of the Criminal Code, dealing with defamation, contravene section nine of the Constitution, which enshrines the right to freedom of expression?l Does the prosecution against Mr Richardson contravene his fundamental right to freedom of expression in a manner which is not reasonably justifiable in a democratic society?The Crown did not oppose the application and Mr Warner agreed to the referral, adjourning the criminal matter until March 31.Mr Richardson was charged on January 7 with unlawfully publishing defamatory material on Facebook last May about Detective Inspector Robert Cardwell. He did not enter a plea.Det Insp Cardwell led an investigation into Mr Richardson in 2009, when 8.2 grams of cannabis and 0.71 grams of cannabis resin were found at his home in Club Road, Smith's.The alleged defamatory material posted on Facebook read: “This detective inspector really has it in for me. Why on earth Robert Cardwell has taken an unhealthy interest in me is astonishing...I really hope it ain't because I'm good at what I do and I'm black...that would make him vindictive and racist...could it be?”