Don’t rush CJ report

[saltwater]

When lord Mustill announced that they will deliver the result before the elections, Manning announced elections next day and give only 5 weeks notice. Now counsel for the tribunal telling the tribunal do not rush the result to meet the election. This sounding more and more like Manning want election before Lord Mustill deliver the verdict. It will be a big blow for the PNM if the result is in favor of the Chief Justice, Sat Sharma. There are just tom many big names involved in the matter for it not to have a significant impact on the election.




By ANDRE BAGOO Monday, October 15 2007
click on pic to zoom in
« prev photo next photo »

REGINALD ARMOUR SC, Counsel to the tribunal appointed to investigate claims of misconduct against suspended Chief Justice Satnarine Sharma is advising tribunal members not to rush to produce their report before the November 5 general election, saying that given the complexity of the matter, “the fixation on producing the report before polling day” could be criticised as taking into account an “irrelevant consideration.”

In written submissions not yet made available to the public and filed on October 8, Armour has advised panel members of the tribunal, Lord Michael Mustill (Chair), Sir Vincent Floissac QC and Dennis Morrison QC, thus to “proceed to consider the whole of the evidence with due deliberation.”

On the tribunal’s last day of sitting, (the Section 137 Tribunal heard evidence from September 17 to 28), Mustill gave the assurance that the tribunal’s final report (recommending whether or not President George Maxwell Richards should refer the question of Sharma’s removal to the Judicial Committee) would be produced, “before the general election.”

“Insofar as this matter is of any account in the assessment by voters of where their vote should lie, they will have the report in front of them,” Mustill said. Allegations of political interference were raised in the tribunal, revolving mainly around the role played by John Jeremie, the Attorney General, in facilitating a land transaction for Sharma’s accuser Chief Magistrate Sherman Mc Nicolls.

But Armour in his written closing submissions dated October 8, wrote in his closing paragraph, “Whilst the tribunal’s mandate is, indeed, one of expedition, it could be said that expedition notwithstanding, what with the admitted complexity of the matter, a fixation on producing the report before polling day... is susceptible to the criticism of taking into account an irrelevant consideration.”

Contacted this week, Armour said he was simply doing his job, pointing out that he had been invited to make closing submissions. “I have not made any recommendations,” he said. “I simply reminded the tribunal of the place of certain evidence. My job is not to evaluate the evidence for the tribunal.”

Other issues dealt with by Armour in his closing submissions include: the effect of cross- examination on the case against the Chief Justice and of how the tribunal is to deal with Mc Nicolls’ land transaction with HCL. On the last day of hearing all parties were invited to submit written submissions in amplification of their oral arguments.

All met the October 8 deadline for such submissions. The tribunal was set up following Mc Nicolls’ charge that Sharma attempted to interfere with the 2006 Basdeo Panday Integrity trial. Panday’s conviction in that matter was eventually quashed on the basis of Mc Nicolls’ “apparent bias”.

Newsday understands that lawyers for all sides in the unprecedented tribunal proceedings have mixed views on Mustill’s promise to make the report available before the election, with some describing Mustill’s position as overtly provocative, and others defending it as part of the tribunal’s undertaking to be transparent and timely.
http://newsday.co.tt/news/0,66017.html

[cm103]

I hope Manning get this one thrown in his face. He running down the CJ so much I hope this one comes back to bite him.

To come out and tell the man "resign or be charged" before he even heard the facts of the case or put him through any kind of judicial review first is biased to the highest extreme.

I know the CJ and his family very well, live in the same neighbourhood so I might be biased in my opinion as well of him. In my eyes he is a stand up person though.

[King B]

Of course he is. All these people who have accused him; the CM, DPP, Deputy CJ, AG and a British QC, are all clearly jealous. :roll:

[saltwater]

Kamla: State lost CJ case

Tuesday, October 16 2007

UNC leader Basdeo Panday yesterday accused Reginald Armour SC of interfering with the judiciary, when he advised tribunal members in the inquiry against Chief Justice Sat Sharma, not to rush to produce their report before the November 5 General Election.

Panday said Armour had no authority to advise the tribunal members and if the members want to submit their report before the election, then they should be free to do so.

“I don’t know why he should interfere with the judiciary, he should let them do their work, and if they are ready with the report they should give it, and if they are not, fair enough,” said Panday.

On October 8, Armour advised panel members of the tribunal, Lord Michael Mustill, Sir Vincent Floissac QC, and Dennis Morrison QC to “proceed to consider the whole of the evidence with due deliberation.”

On the tribunal’s last day of sitting Mustill gave the assurance that the tribunal’s final report would be produced, “before the General Election.”

But Armour wrote in his closing paragraph to the tribunal “that a fixation on producing the report before polling day... is susceptible to the criticism of taking into account an irrelevant consideration.”

Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar yesterday said the Government might be trying to delay the release of the tribunal’s report until after November 5 because “it may well be that the writing is on the wall and they know that it is going to go against them.” She told reporters this outside the Siparia Regional Corporation’s office on High Street, Siparia after she filed her nomination papers. She again made the claim on the UNC Alliance platform in Gasparillo where she told supporters that Armour had written the tribunal because he knew the State had already lost its case.

COP candidate for St Joseph, Gillian Lucky, yesterday said there should be no time-line one way or another to try to relate the decision of the tribunal to the date of the election.

She said while the tribunal must be allowed sufficient time to make its decision, on the other hand once their decision had been made it should be publicised as soon as possible.

[saltwater]

http://newsday.co.tt/news/0,66149.html

Uproar over Armour

By ANDRE BAGOO Wednesday, October 17 2007

THE VICE President of the Law Association yesterday lashed out at a call from Reginald Armour SC, the counsel to the CJ Tribunal, advising the tribunal to not rush its report before the General Election, saying such a call opened Armour up to “severe criticism.”

The tribunal is investigating claims that suspended Chief Justice Satnarine Sharma interfered with the 2006 Basdeo Panday trial, and will produce a report recommending whether or not the President should refer the question of the removal of Sharma to the Judicial Committee. Sharma has raised counter-claims of political interference on the part of Attorney General John Jeremie and the Executive.

Yesterday Armour stuck to his guns and hit back at those who have alleged the exertion of “political pressure”in his decision to advise the tribunal to take their time.

Yesterday, the law body’s VP Hendrickson Seunath SC said such advice was not consistent with “the interests of justice.”

“I think he is opening himself up to serious criticism and frankly my personal view is that he was out of place to advise the tribunal as such,” Seunath said of Armour’s call for the tribunal to avoid a “fixation on producing the report before polling day.”

But Seunath made it clear that he was coming to no conclusions on the matter himself, saying the report could either vindicate the Government or Sharma.

The tribunal was aware that elections were in the air and went on to deliberately hold its proceedings in public... This affects the people of the country it doesn’t affect Sharma, Jeremie or (Prime Minister Patrick) Manning,” he said.

He was joined yesterday by Desmond Allum SC, the head of the Criminal Bar Association, who issued a press release criticising Armour’s advice as “impertinent.”

“Let the chips fall where they may and let them do so before the General Election,” he said.

As reported on Monday, Armour on October 8 advised the tribunal, comprising Lord Mustill (Chair), Sir Vincent Floissac QC and Dennis Morrison QC, to not rush to produce the report before the next General election, as had been promised by Mustill on the tribunal’s last day of hearing.

In a letter dated October 16 and addressed to one of Sharma’s attorneys Dennis Gurley, Armour defends his position.

Responding to a letter from Gurley dated October 15 in which Gurley raises the spectre of possible political interference, Armour considered Gurley’s position to “be tiresome.”

Armour letter was copied to the Tribunal Secretariat.

[peanut]

Of course he is. All these people who have accused him; the CM, DPP, Deputy CJ, AG and a British QC, are all clearly jealous. :roll:

Brian, this is one that is going to bite the Gov't in the derrierre and I hope they get bitten before the elections. The only reason I suspect that Armour is begging the Tribunal to hold back their findings till after the elections, it's because they [the Gov't] suspect Sharma will be vindicated and it will definitely hurt the PNM in the elections.

[sam48]

I agree whole heartedly.
This is only one of many instances of the kind of abuse of power and dictatorial tendencies that Valley has warned us about on the part of Manning.