You are hereCreate Content / A Cheated Public
A Cheated Public
“Resign or be Charged” was the unforgettable, screaming headline that signaled the start of this crisis. PM Manning had given the CJ an ultimatum. Manning had warned him that this time around he would not go the impeachment route because he felt the evidence warranted a full scale criminal prosecution.
Manning demonstrated his seriousness by getting the police and the DPP fully involved and a criminal investigation was launched. Sharma’s office was searched and police showed up at his home late one Friday evening determined to arrest him and probably keep him in prison for the weekend. They were blocked by an injunction. Sharma was vilified for trying to place himself beyond the reach of the criminal law as if he was above, and not equal before, the law.
Sharma lost public sympathy because he tried to block the criminal trial. He eventually lost his appeal in the Privy Council (PC). The public had grown weary of the whole scandal and just wanted closure. People were disillusioned and wanted public justice so that they could judge for themselves. Somebody was lying. Let the truth prevail and the chips fall where they must.
The PC judgment cleared the way for the criminal prosecution the State said it wanted. There were no other proceedings in existence. Collateral or otherwise. It is against this backdrop that one has to analyze the refusal by Chief Magiatrate Sherman Mc Nicholls to testify. His decision not to testify is fundamentally flawed because he was wearing the hat and status of a mere witness for the prosecution and had no choice but to testify. It was his duty to do so: he was the star witness for the prosecution!
The reason given by Mc Nicholls for changing his mind is that he felt the existence and pursuit of parallel impeachment proceedings would be oppressive. He based his conclusion on the judgment of the PC. As Deputy DPP Carla Brown-Antoine retorted, the judgment makes no such comment or statement. It could not, for the simple reason that no issue about impeachment of Sharma was ever raised at the PC as the PM had made it quite clear from the outset that he did not wish to go that route this time around. He wanted to have Sharma arrested, charged and prosecuted for the commission of a criminal offence.
The gargantuan proportions of this entire fiasco became apparent when the PM stated that he had not yet taken any decision to impeach the CJ as he is in the preliminary stage of gathering the relevant facts. To what collateral proceedings was Mr Mc Nicholls referring then? Even if he mistakenly thought there were two sets of proceedings against his CJ why did he not tell the PM that he will not be prepared to testify at any impeachment hearing because he was about to testify in the criminal trial and this had to take precedence because it had reached too advanced a stage and he had come too far to turn back now. Besides, wasn’t this what the PM said he wanted all along?
How was Mc Nicholls able to predict that there is going to be a second fresh set of proceedings against the CJ that would have rivaled the criminal trial? Why is he so confident that this is bound to happen when the PM is saying he hasn’t even gathered all the facts, far less taken a decision on whether to impeach? Does the Chief Magistrate have ‘inside’ political information? Is he part of the political conspiracy to hound the CJ out of office? On what or whose authority does he treat the impeachment as a foregone conclusion?
If we are to believe the PM that his mind is open on the issue and is not yet made up the dangerous consequences of Mc Nicholl’s refusal to testify crystallize. What if the PM decides against impeachment? The criminal trial has been aborted and the public has been cheated out of its right to know whether Sharma as a sitting CJ really attempted to pervert the course of justice. Conversely, Shama would have been deprived of his right to challenge his accuser, prove his innocence and vindicate himself. If Sharma is guilty, Mc Nicholls would have allowed a criminal to continue to serve as CJ when he should be behind bars. If he is innocent, Mc Nicholl’s would have maliciously orchestrated the removal of the nation’s CJ as part of a wider political conspiracy in a general election year and escaped with impunity. We might never know the truth now and the public has been cheated out of its right to public justice.
- 986 reads
Anand speaks for all of us average reasonable people. Where is the reason in McNicolls' actions? It escapes us. If there was no conspiracy at the time of going to the PC, McNicolls' amazing foreknowledge and foresight of impeachment proceedings must now awaken the intelligent to the real possibility of a conspiracy.
One must wonder if the local Bar Association in Trinidad will now sit on it's hands and allow McNichols' conduct to be left without investigation.
Some time ago we had an unknown voice calling from up high to release two Bajan fishermen. Now I know it was not the Almighty, and I know that was about flying fish, not red herrings.
I wonder though, does any one but me find it suspicious that Sherman McNicolls is not even being questioned over a fishy land deal made with a witness in a case he was still presiding over, and yet Sharma being done over on several simultaneous fronts? I dimly recall that it was only when Sharma questioned Shermie about the deal that he dropped the ax on Sharma and complained about the interference in the Panday case. The ethics of buying land from a witness in a case he was still presiding over, at preferential rates, may be boggling to many, but not to Shermie. Hmm, was this a case of taking in front?
Considering that his was the complaint that the charges were based upon, and given that the Privy Council recommended a criminal trial as the best solution to air all grievances, it is indeed more than passing strange that he refuses to give evidence at trial. I suppose when you are the Chief Magistrate you are allowed to decide whether you are going to testify or not. Not so for everyday folks like you or me though, lest you think you can refuse to testify in court in future. It's his decision as a 'judicial officer' remember?
"As a judicial officer I form my own decisions on the law..."
"In my judgement it would have been improper both in principle and in law to allow for the cross-examination of evidence in two separate proceedings..."
But again I am wondering if the real reason is that the details of a particular land deal may have to be made public.... as indeed the Privy Council commented it has not been. Any one have any thoughts?
I just have to wonder how on earth McNicholls could make his decision based centrally on a principle of law that made it improper for "...the cross-examination of evidence in two separate proceedings" - when there was only in our reality only one such proceeding, and any supposed second proceeding that he referred to was not intended or decided upon.
Could McNicholls have had such clear visions of impeachment, that the power of those visions caused a time warp in his understanding of events - to the extent his temporal perception of the past, present and future became conflated into one? In other words could the gentleman be afflicted by a surreal time-warp and a hyper-reality that he reflects upon all of us who live in what we think is the real world.
Or could McNicholls be in contact with 'The Matrix' and the rest of us are all living in a dream world?
I dont understand why all this fear and respect when addressing Manning. This ' Prime Minister' title has to be dropped. The man is a racist dictator , so please give up false titles. Just call him Manning. You have to lessen the amount to respect shown to him, because he is an outright selfish doctator. In the US the president cannot have more than two terms. Too long power causes corruption and the man Manning wants to die running the island, How power hungry could you be ? The man is a selfish power hungry maniac and hat is what he should be known as. Not 'honorable prime minister'
would like my country to be crime free and go back to the old time values
I agree with your comment, but i am confused with my people Trinis, for if the other political parties do not resolve their issues and join together -we like it so -and it will be PNM forever.
Every thing in this country is controlled by politics and people cannot see this , they believe it is divine intervention for the good or bad that we get every day.
People wake up and tell our leaders that we must get together on issues and take control of our country and lives for it is being eroded day by day, locked up at 6.00 pm in our castle and flicking Cable channels.
would like my country to be crime free and go back to the old time values