You are hereAnand's Collection / Singing for Supper?
Singing for Supper?
The scandalous and shameful inaction on the part of the Judicial & Legal Services Commission (JLSC) regarding the recommendation in the Justice Ventour report that Chief Magistrate Sherman Mc Nichols face disciplinary charges for misconduct is ridiculous. It is a clear case of different strokes for different folks.
It is almost farcical given the revelation that the President suspended the Chief Justice but is yet to even issue instruments of appointment and swear in the members of the tribunal that must conduct the enquiry into whether there is just cause for removing the CJ.
The resolutions passed by the Law Association (LA) this week seek to force the hand of the JLSC. I accept the criticism that the LA should have been more proactive in the past, about other pressing matters that affect the administration of justice in the public interest but the present state of affairs is totally unacceptable and needed urgent action. The profession is divided on the issue and today I wish to explain the invisible price tag that is attached to standing up for principle for in many ways, they have nothing to gain and everything to lose.
CJ Satnarine Sharma is on the eve of his retirement and is therefore not in any position to grant favours of any type to lawyers. I have been warned by many that I should not be publicly vocal about this crisis because he is on his way out and cannot assist my professional career advancement. Many have counselled that the judges who do not support CJ Sharma and probably can’t wait to see his back will victimize me. My clients could suffer, as judges have unlimited jurisdiction and power in a case and could be unconsciously (or consciously) biased against me. They could legitimately exercise their subjective discretion against believing my witnesses and to top it off, I would never be appointed a senior counsel.
I continue to stand up for what I believe in because far too many in our society are prepared to sacrifice principle for the sake of personal advancement. The judges I appear before cannot be so petty or else they should not have been appointed judges in the first place. The idea that the system could be so small-minded makes me sick because it means that the independence and fairness of judges is a farce. As for career advancement, the only cause I seek to advance is that of justice. Being appointed a senior counsel does not magically enhance my ability or change my principles.
Many of my colleagues who have stood firm in the midst of this onslaught against the CJ have been dubbed supporters of Sharma. Truth be told, like many of them, I am more interested in defending the sacred constitutional principles that are at stake. These principles include the right to an independent judiciary free from political interference manned by judges whose tenure is secure and cannot be suspended or removed except in very limited situations. It is in defence of the office of CJ and not Mr Sharma. Whether I like him or not, it is my duty to defend the constitution. To remove him in the absence of a properly appointed and/or functioning tribunal when the constitution makes this a clear pre-condition to suspension is wrong.
There are many who have stood against this administration on this matter that has no political allegiance. They have suffered a serious backlash and paid a dear price. In some cases, the Attorney General has withdrawn State briefs and re-distributed them to other lawyers who are perceived to be on the side of the government. Work from State enterprises have dried up. The financial price tag has been a high one. With nothing to gain and everything to lose, these colleagues continue to stand tall and firm, even as they continue to be criticized by those who are now in gleeful receipt of lucrative briefs from the government.
The irony of lawyers (most of whom were appointed senior counsel under the PNM) supporting the government as they continue to chew on fat State briefs while they accuse others who have acted to their personal detriment of not standing up for principle seems to be lost. Perhaps there is greater principle in not biting the hand that feeds you than in defending the constitution that is the cornerstone of law, justice and order. Hopefully, history will record that while some were busy singing for their supper, a few brave souls defended the sanctity of our constitution during its darkest hour.
By Anand Ramlogan 2007-07-07
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Singing_for_Supper.pdf | 12.23 KB |
- Printer-friendly version
- Login or register to post comments
- 872 reads
What Anand points to is sheer small mindedness, short-sightedness and idiocy among his own fraternity.
It may be no consolation to Anand and others that the same crap happens in the medical profession - my fraternity. Some of the most atocious Human Rights abuses in the history of mankind have been allowed or facilitated by weak doctors who turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to systems delivering abuse - examples: the Nazi death camps, Abu Ghraib, and St Ann's Hospital in Trinidad & Tobago.
When the time comes to stand - what happens? People run. When it is time to speak up - what do people do? Shut up. When your mortgage, pension and food on the family table are threatened - what do you do? You do as you are told! You hide behind law, rules, dictat and authority. You allow others rights to be abused - this is the medical profession - and I am not surprised I'm seeing some of the same patterns in the legal profession.
As human beings we are timid animals. We are afraid of power, death, suffering or even mild discomfort. We best demonstrate our selfishness when anything threatens to cause us and our loved ones discomfort or death. So we do the selfish or self-protective thing i.e. instead of sticking together for the good of the many we stupidly protect our own. The power of this behavioural pattern among our species is always to divide - and politicians of a certain callous dispostion will exploit it forever and ever to 'rule' us into oblivion. The division runs deep and fast. Friends, professional colleagues and families are divided.
When the political sledge hammer falls on communities neighbours turn against each other. Read about what happened in Rwanda and former Yugoslavia. What allyuh feel it cyah happen in happy ol' T&T? Allyuh wait right dey!
In the absence of timely evidence and openness on material fact relevant to the CJ's suspension it appears that the President has illegally suspended the Chief Justice. What is the legal fraternity doing? Apparently they are confined to just biting their nails on a matter of the utmost and extreme Constitutional importance in the history of the Nation. A divided motion among 100 of some 2000 lawyers is not good news.
I hope that the business community in T&T wake up and smell the coffee. It is a brand of coffee called dictatorship - and it doh smell good. The business community in T&T stands to lose tremendously if dictatorship becomes a reality. We are starring at its makings right now. Wake up please!
It is not possible to predict with accuracy that dictatorship will hit T&T. However, T&T is heading down a road very similar to Zimbabwe. There is no room for selfishness at this time. The business and legal communities must come together and invest money and time in preventing disaster for a whole nation.
It is very disconcerting to know that that the "political fallout" arising from the whole episode of the "allegations" by the CM, McNichols against CJ Sharma, and the resulting suspension of the CJ, would have such impact on the "Law Profession" in general.
It is to Anand's credit to tell it as it is, and to explain it on a more personal level, so that it creates an awareness of its existence to the unsuspecting public. Thanks for the insight.!
It is even more disconcerting to learn, that the JLSC has by its actions and/or inactions, began behaving more like a "political arm" of the government of the day, more than an independent body on its own, and capable of making sound and rationale decisions, in dispensing fairness and equity in law and principle, in an open and transparent manner.
It is obvious from the example set by them on this issue to date, that "some people are more equal than other people", and they have demonstrated that behaviour and attitude in their carriage of this file on the McNichols issue.
It is unfortunate that "Politics" and "Political Arm Twisting" has been injected into the judicial system, and that severe consequences befall those who openly adopt certain positions that would appear to run counter to the current administration. It is also more unfortunate, that certain "penalties" are levied against such individuals, and in layman's terms, these may be construed as "subtle blackmail" to keep them at bay.
It is a sad day in the history of Trinidad, when "Leadership and Integrity" have become a "bankrupt commodity", and those who are tasked with these roles and responsibilities, shirk them in favour of excuses and avoidance, and as such creates a deeper level of mistrust in such an important and crucial juncture in the History of our country. There was no reason for it!
No reasonable person could accept their "excuse" for allowing McNichols to continue to sit on the bench, in the face of Judge Ventour Report, as plausible or believable, as it is lacking both in logic and/or reasoning. It was just what it was, a lame excuse, to support a political end of the scale. That was deplorable.
To now force the Law Association to intervene and to implore the President, The Tribunal and the JLSC to act in good conscience and to do the "right things", while worthy of the Law Association to do so, but it should not have had to reach to this level, had the JLSC done its duty in the first place, and this would have all been avoided and unnecessary.
Instead of calming the fears of its citizens, and reinforcing the concept that the Law and the Judiciary are intact and reputable, and its integrity is not compromised or stained by Politics, the JLSc by its behaviour did exactly the opposite, and created more anxiety in the minds of its citizens. Who should we trust?
If we cannot trust our own people who are installed to administrate our judiciary fairly and without bias, then we are surely doomed for failure. These are uncalled for, and the JLSC must self-examine its self and its role in our democratic society, and be the shining example to its people by doing the "right things" even when they may not seem so "popular" to the regime who have them there, they must refrain from being enticed into playing politics, and carry out their mandate without fear or favour.
It is still not too late to stand up and do the right thing, as no "reasonable thinking person" can or will accept your excuses on not suspending McNichols, that it will do more harm than good, and that it was better for the country, is all fallacy! Stop dreaming in "technicolour".
Start by treating all people equally under the law, and begin recognising and accepting your mistake by correcting them promptly, this will instill some trust back into the judicial system.
Remember, you can't lose what you don't have! and right now, you don't have too much! godbless. trini.t.o.o.
The one unfortunate circumstance is that the members of the JLSC will 'weather the storm' and still remain in their repective positions, still benefitting in whatever ways they do now.
Accountabiltiy is one thing, but it MUST be tempered with suitable punishment. It is only fear of punishment (or anticipation of reward) that brings results.
One can never 'trust' people 'to do the right thing' which is why so many laws and statutes have checks and balances built into them along with punishment.
Jumbie, you raise some interesting points. Besides punishment and reward there was a time when shame used to operate as something that would drive people to do the right thing.
And I see shame as a separate thing from punishment because it is your awareness of others perceiving you in a bad light. It is not like someone hitting you with a stick or restricting your freedom (as per jail).
However, what I'm seeing as a member of the public is that the JLSC has lost self-awareness - and it seems like its individual members can't be bothered to feel even shame.
But in order to feel shame one must have a degree of self-respect first because without that there is nothing to lose - and shame becomes irrelevant.
Even some canines (aka dog's) have self-awareness, self-respect and shame - if you've ever seen them in mating mode many of them seem to like some privacy.
When I see a vagrant eating discarded hamburgers from a bin - there is no self-respect and therefore no shame. There is no punishment for eating out a bin but there may be reward in fending off hunger.
So am I to conclude that the JLSC is now lost self-respect and reduced its standing to lower than dog - to vagrant status? Well I couldn't be trying to shame that which is incapable of demonstrating capacity for shame. So Anand was right: while their actions were shameful they appear shameless.
Singing for supper? Should we jump for joy? In a monkey pants? To JLSC some people are more equal than others? I believe them all to be true! .
But now we have "To JLSC - some people are more equal than others part 2." Yes, different strokes for different folks! Talk about double standards!
To cite in part from today's Newsday reports:
Mc Nicolls’ lawyers draft JLSC response
By ANDRE BAGOO Friday, August 17 2007
CHIEF MAGISTRATE Sherman Mc Nicolls has instructed his lawyers to draft a response to the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (JLSC) regarding four disciplinary charges brought against him in relation to the failed criminal case against suspended Chief Justice Satnarine Sharma.
Legal sources said Mc Nicolls is insisting he did nothing wrong in refusing to be cross-examined in the matter which ended abruptly on March 5 in the Port-of-Spain Fourth Magistrates’ Court.
According to sources close to the Chief Magistrate he has instructed his attorneys to draft a statement of denial in response to the four charges brought against him. This statement is expected to be filed before the JLSC deadline of August 30. Sources revealed yesterday that it is Mc Nicolls’ view that the details of the proceedings against him should not come to light as he is a sitting magistrate, a stance the sources regarded yesterday as ‘‘extraordinary.’’
The JLSC is the body that is constitutionally responsible for the appointment, removal and exercise of disciplinary control over judicial officers.
Because the Chief Magistrate is denying the charges, the Commission will have to consider the appointment of a disciplinary tribunal. This tribunal will investigate the matter further and produce a final report, recommending what action, if any, is to be taken against Mc Nicolls.
Mc Nicolls has been served with four disciplinary charges which allege that he brought the judiciary of Trinidad and Tobago into disrepute by not allowing himself to be cross-examined in the criminal case against Sharma.
The charges also allege that Mc Nicolls has, by extension, also brought the JLSC itself into disrepute. Newsday understands that the wording of the other two charges duplicate these two charges.
While it is expected that Mc Nicholls rights must be respected and he be given every opportunity to properly defend himself, there is no reason in the world why he should be able to use the excuse that as a "sitting magistrate" details of the proceedings against him should not come to light.
This is clearly wrong. The JLSC should move promptly to address that by "suspending him from duties immediately."
This had been also requested by the Law Association, and now that charges has been filed against him based on the findings of Judge Ventour's Report, there are no ongoing reasons JLSC should not act on his immediate suspension.
Quite frankly, it is my view that Mc Nicholls should not be sitting, standing or lying on the "bench" at this time until his charges has been resolved, the same treatment that has been afforded the Chief Justice.
Afterall, the Chief Justice was suspended based on Mc Nicholls allegations only, while the charges against Mc Nicholls has been filed based on the review and findings of Judge Ventour's Report, which I believe to have more credibility at this time.
In addition, I am not of the opinion that Mc Nicholls should be able to remain in active duty based on his "defence" of his preference of forum to give evidence, but rather await like the CJ until the appropriate opportunity is presented to defend himself is given, the same as everyone else.
He should not be treated any differently, and in this regard, the JLSC which has already dragged its feet since April 2007 to now to read, interpret and action Judge Ventour's Report, should wait no further to "suspend Mc Nicholls" until his charges are dealt with and resolved in due course.
Justice must be seen to dispensed "equally and fairly" to each and everyone if the Judiciary is to regain its integrity, which at this moment is under constant and severe attack.
There are signals of compromise of the Judiciary, which began at the very top, from the Office of President right down to the Prime Minister and the Attorney General, and these must be given quick attention so as to restore faith in the system.
The JLSC has that opportunity to begin that process now, and no further delays would be an acceptable excuse. The Law Association has also voiced their concerns on the Mc Nicholls treatment by JLSC. Therefore now is the time to act!
To JLSC, the delay is over, the charges have been laid, move expeditiously to provide him fair and equitable treatment to which he is entitled under law, give him his dues...
But do "suspend" him immediately, its the right thing to do!
It is imperative that not only justice is done, but it is also "seen" to be done equally and fairly to each and every one without exception.
The Nation is watching...
Goodluck and Godbless. Trini.t.o.o.
You know , we grow up listening to all the cliches and "idioms" from our parents and older siblings, that they are so ingrained in our minds that we remember them as "truths". Until we grow in own experiences and know otherwise. Words are amazing. They convey meanings that only the individual intepreting them could truly impart.
Wouldn't it be great if everyone could really understand what everyone else was saying? Take for instance "Dont bite the hand that feed you." What if that hand is also giving you false support? Or is it only the money ("food") that counts?. Do you ever contemplate of the rights and wrongs of that "hand that feeds you"? Let's tell it like it is. In the home, this old cliche' was supposed to mean, be respectful to your parents. Now, in Public, it means just bribery. Bottomline. Anywhere. All over the world. You take care of me, I support you. Are we not supposed to give a hoot about what you do to others?
Is the Attorney Genral's Office of Trinidad and Tobago engaging in Bribery. In this case gaining support through work handouts? Because believe me, they are handouts. I hesitate to believe that anything this government does is based on merit. I once hoped that Richards, once becoming President Richards would make a difference. That he would adhere to his initial speech and stand up for everyone. Now, we see, he is either an ill advised atheist, or a political puppet.
Again, I hesitate to believe that a man so cleverly decorated with academic achievements and honorary titles would have no cojones and become a puppet. So what is the answer? Is the President an atheist? Does he not believe that doing wrong, especially in his capacity of trust is going to require God's compensation? No, he goes to church, right? Is he ill advised? I wonder? Is he advised at all or just given instructions.
The state of The State of Trinidad and Tobago is dire. We cannot look to outside nations to interfere in our bacchannal. We must do it ourselves. I recently read the news about an Afro-Trini Hindu who charges a judge with bias. This is a shining example of a People who know each other. He had to use three words to identify himself. An Afro Trini Hindu. And he went on to say that when he travelled he visited other denominations without shame. A man with cojones. An Individual. As night turns to day we can see our way. Come on, let's buy flashlights or light some flambeaux.
Well I nearly fell off my chair when I read the Newsday 2007-08-15 report that the JLSC charged McNicols with 4 counts of misconduct.
It all looks like a hush hush affair. Does that explain why the Impeachment Tribunal has been lying low?
Now dey in a real monkey pants or what? Ah mean what Lord Mustill et al go be doing now? If I was them I would be chillin' out at a Hilton somewhere sipping pina coladas, while the politicians entertain.
At this moment I am speechless. Many of us at this site should take credit for guiding the JSLC to a correct decision to discipline the man!
Ah doh know if to jump for joy as yet...yuh know how t'ings have a strange way of operating in T&T.
We should all jump for joy Captain Walker.. because soon they all wearing "monkey pants", JLSC, Law Association and the Tribunal? This all about "real monkey business", isn't it?
And lets not forget, the President, the Prime Minister, and the Attorney General, all playing "rawan", all engaged in the same "monkey business".
To quote in today's Newsday, " Law Assn: Suspend Chief Magistrate
Thursday, August 16 2007
VICE-PRESIDENT of the Law Association Hendrickson Seunath SC yesterday called for Chief Magistrate Sherman Mc Nicolls’ immediate suspension in the wake of four disciplinary charges being brought against him by the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (JLSC).
“I think in all fairness that should be done. The charge against him is a serious charge because of who he is. He is the Chief Magistrate (and) it is not proper to have him sit in judgment of people. Greater harm will be done by leaving him in office. We are not speaking about personalities but the judicial system. Citizens need to have confidence in justice,” Seunath told Newsday yesterday afternoon.
Mc Nicolls has been served with four disciplinary charges which allege that he brought the judiciary into disrepute by not allowing himself to be cross-examined in the criminal case against suspended Chief Justice Sat Sharma.
The charges also allege that Mc Nicolls has, by extension, also brought the JLSC itself into disrepute. The wording of two other charges that make up the four were not available up to late yesterday. Newsday understands the JLSC will once more discuss the possible suspension of Mc Nicolls at its next meeting." unquote.
Then there is the second article on Sharma and his legal fees:
Sharma wants $3.8M
By ANDRE BAGOO Thursday, August 16 2007
SUSPENDED CHIEF Justice Satnarine Sharma is waiting on Government to approve his request of $3.8M in up-front legal costs in order for him to secure representation before the tribunal appointed to investigate claims of misconduct against him.
This figure alone will almost double the cost of the entire Sharma affair. Sources close to Sharma said he flew to London yesterday evening on an economy-class ticket in order to meet his London-based counsel in the matter to discuss a 39-page statement filed with the tribunal by Chief Magistrate Sherman Mc Nicolls, alleging impropriety during the 2006 Basdeo Panday Integrity trial.
In addition to Robertson and Brimelow, Sharma has retained local attorneys Pamela Elder SC, Sophia Chote and Rajiv Persad. On June 4, the CJ wrote to President George Maxwell Richards asking for financial assistance in the matter, but the President referred him to the Attorney General as the “appropriate body” for such a request.
By letter dated July 3, Attorney General John Jeremie agreed “to meet the reasonable cost incurred by the Chief Justice” in connection with the proceedings before the Tribunal. According to documentation, the State incurred at least $1.4M in the Sharma matter thus far." Unquote
You so right, they all in "monkey pants", everyone of them, they all playing "monkey business", now that the music finish, they all ready to dance.
Well lets see who will play "Monkey see, Monkey do". This is a real carnival side show, only thing missing is the "steel band".. Mas for so! But don't worry, all the "key players" in the "band" now getting ready to show their "real colours", they all want to win the "Grand Prize".
Sadly enough, the only real losers in the end, will be the hardworking taxpaying citizens of our country who has no choice but to stand by and let the "band go by", and not be able to play mas with "the drunken sailors" jumping up and spending the people's monies as if it going out of style! from the president right down to the prime minister who leading the band, like the "pied piper" all going down the river in a "leaky boat" at that!
Thanks to the comments I have seen on this site that have made some impact in my mind, to shake some senses in the right quarters and in the right direction, even if its coming at "snail pace". Never too late!
Keep at it my friends, justice prevails, always will, always does.!
Goodluck and godbless! Trini.t.o.o.
Now, I might be from the canefield, and not trained in law like Shermie is, but look at this:
And this:
Like the McDonald's ads say, 'I'm loving it'.
Is it clear to anyone else there is a separate law for Shermie, and another for Sharma?
Now, don't get me wrong, everything is going on above board now...
The Newsday reports:
Right!! It is very clear. The JLSC, responsible for regulation and discipline of the legal fraternity, is not allowed to do so any more!! It can be brought to heel, told to **** off. The best part of that above quote: well, you can basically tell them to '**** off' PERMANENTLY. (I have to explore the law and see if I can apply this to Inland Revenue about my taxes. Won't that be cool!!).
Only in Trinidad, land of Monkey Island Justice.... I'm loving it.
I partly agree with McNichols. The man has a few interesting points.
Regardless of who he is and ourindividual moral position on his conduct these matters must be handled properly and in a timely way. He has an equal right to justice even if there has been apparent injustices eleswhere.
However, I have to wonder if all of these moves were not foreseen. Did the JLSC, Pa-Trick, Max Richards, and McNicholls not forsee all this? It now makes sense that they could have been foreseen. Why else bring the Impeachment Tribunal - if there was any real risk that McNichols would have been disciplined - he being so central to the inquiries of the Tribunal?
Are we looking at the biggest pappy show in the history of Trinidad & Tobago? Don't be surprised if McNichols is succesful against the JLSC, and the impeachment rushes ahead to kick out Sat Sharma - as I said before (here) strange things do happen in law.
The main problem is that no matter how we personally feel about the issues and parties invloved, it is becoming glaringly obvious that the law is not being applied evenly. That is also my main concern.
Thanks to Captain Walker and Jumbie for keeping this issue alive and on the front burner, where it should be!
The problem is not Sherman McNicholls, the problem lies some where between President Max Richards and the Prime Minister Patrick Manning. McNicholls is only the "pawn" in the game, but Max and Patrick are the "real players" here. Its all a "political game" !
To recall, CJ Sharma said at the outset that it was all a Political Conspiracy, and its proving so far to be just that, a "political football."
It not reasonable to believe that with all the "legal experience" within the JLSC, and all the top legal counsel at their disposal and available to them, would not foresee this laughable outcome after some six months of hand wringing before deciding to act on the "Ventour Report."
The blame does not lie with McNicholls, its lies squarely with JLSC for dragging its feet and not acting on their own, but as if waiting for instructions from someone who was "pulling the strings" and knew exactly what was going to happen once they acted.
This is a "farce", an "empty gesture" to those who were calling for some action to be taken against McNicholls. An appeasement to the Law Association as though it was a meaningful action being taken, but knowing full well that they (the JLSC) had "compromised" themselves by not doing anything for all this time.
It is not that its over, its just that they have made it an uphill struggle to discipline McNicholls, something they were very reluctant to do all along, and this empty gesture is all that it is, an empty gesture. Going through the motions, tra-la-la-la-la-la.! Just show me the motion.....!
In the meantime, the Tribunal will go forward on CJ Sharma, and if it goes according to plan, they all come out a "winner", except CJ Shama, who has been and will be exposed to more personal embarrasment, much of which had been contemplated by the "political conspirators" all along.
We'll just have to wait and see the fallout, and whether it result in any impact at all on the Tribunal and their deliberations on the hearing and its final outcome.!
In my humble opinion, there is a whole lot there to come out in the open yet, and the "game is not over, till the fat lady sings".
The truth is yet to be revealed, the whole truth that is!
Patience is virtue my friends, patience is bliss, patience!
Goodluck and Godbless! Trini.t.o.o.