A war of words is emerging between some attorneys in the Law Association and a former president of the body who is alleged to have been advising the Judicial and Legal Service Commission, as attorneys get set to vote today on a motion of no confidence in Chief Justice Ivor Archie and calling for his resignation and those of the JLSC members.
This was in response to a warning from former association president Reginald Armour, who expressed the public view that the errors of the JLSC in relation to the Marcia Ayers-Caesar fiasco did not begin to approach the threshold for their removal.
Armour said he had taken note of today’s meeting, noting it was “nothing short of an impeachment procedure.”
In a statement yesterday, attorneys Israel Khan SC, Wayne Sturge, Patricia Dindyal, Mario Merritt and Dinesh Rambally thanked Armour for his informative contribution.
They said: “We are all grateful for his incisive and timely intervention on this issue having regard to his familiarity with the issues, he having been the legal advisor to the Judicial and Legal Service Commission on matters relating to the issues at hand.”
But they advised him that the issue at the heart of today’s meeting “is not whether the Chief Justice’s behaviour has reached the threshold for impeachment proceedings. It is simply about whether an independent bar, cognisant of its duty to protect the public and uphold the rule of law, still has confidence in the Chief Justice and the Judicial and Legal Service Commission.”
The attorneys made it clear that Law Association members “are entitled to express no confidence in anyone just as they did in 2009 when they expressed no confidence in the then attorney general and called upon him to resign.”
It was obvious then, they said, that the association “had no power to remove a Cabinet Minister but expressed its undoubted right to censure the titular head of the bar. Likewise, in this instance members of the bar are entitled to express their lack of confidence in the specific office holders about whom this motion is brought. “
The attorneys described it as “an insult to the intelligence of all attorneys to equate a motion of no confidence with the constitutional process provided under Section 136 of the Constitution,” as the two “are entirely different.”
Armour, they added, “ought to, and does know better. “
President of the Assembly of Southern Lawyers (ASL) Rashard Khan yesterday urged all of his members legal profession to attend the meeting. He said it was “that your voice be heard. It is important that your vote in support or not, be counted.”
Khan noted that “the last few weeks has seen the legal profession burdened with several high profile disputes that have been described by many concerned observers as scandalous.” The turbulence caused by the dispute, he said, “will only be calmed when full discourse of all the facts and issues occur. This petition and the voice of the Law Association as a collective has its vital role to play in that process.”
TTTI wants accountability
The Trinidad and Tobago Transparency Institute (TTTI) says the issue of governance, transparency and accountability in the judicial system must be addressed.
Expressing its own concern about the events in the Judiciary and legal system yesterday, TTTI said the recent events “have engendered public debate about the governance of our legal system and are strong indicators of the need for review of a fundamental institution that supports our democracy.”
It noted that there are many unanswered questions fuelling the debate, but felt there was need for “urgent systemic change.” That change, it said, should be done in a way that “the independence and respect of the judiciary is maintained while responding to public demand for accountability.”
TTTI virtually echoed the voice of those in the legal fraternity who have been calling for greater transparency in the selection of those appointed to the bench, saying “at the very least, the criteria and methodology for selection of those who are entrusted with the responsibility of imparting justice at the highest level must be transparent and available to the public. The credibility of our judicial system and the integrity and resilience of our democracy demands attention to these processes.”
Stating that the “foundation of our democracy is built on the rule of law,” TTTI said it considers these issues to be of considerable importance, “not only to the governance of the legal system but also the governance of our country.”
As such, it said this calls “for urgent and tangible action by the administrators of our legal system to review the mechanisms related to the governance of the judiciary so that integrity, transparency and public accountability are upheld.” Such action, it added, should be done in a manner which will “strengthen and not weaken the rule of law and the governance of the legal system.”
Clik here to view.
