THE EDITOR:
IT is clear that the Opposition is now going through the motions of its last and biggest disgrace.

Hopefully once they have eaten each other alive and wiped out their movement, a strong, new force will emerge to finally oppose the People’s National Movement (PNM).

For months, valuable media space and air time have been devoted to listening to people like Kamla Persad-Bissessar, Jack Warner and Wade Mark and all the rest of this filthy bunch, who sicken us with all their hollow claims of love and care for the people of this country.

Now, to be able to exhibit such a level of abject shamelessness to come to the public and bascially say, “well forget what we said before, the truth is that we just wanted Emperor Bas to come back and lead us.”

You upset an entire nation for the sake of strategy?

You have brought sadness to the hearts of your supporters so that you can have an ex-con come back to lead your party?

You have basically allowed people to be slaughtered, raped, kidnapped and assaulted, just so that you have the time to mount a needless and stupid campaign to return a corrupt man to leadership.

I’m sorry to say this, but if the people opposed to the PNM, people who put their last hopes into the Opposition, allow this to just pass without rising against it.

Then every single one of us deserves exactly what we get!

THE EDITOR:
ISRAEL KHAN sees powerful institutions as being under attack -- the offices of the PM, AG, DPP and Chief Magistrate (but not the CJ of course).

He went on to state that the charge being laid on July 14, carries the maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

Murder, we know, carries that.

The basis of the two charges being laid at the feet of the CJ appear to be mooted in denying him his inalienable and basic right to freedom of speech, guaranteed under our Constitution, both in the discharge of his duties and privately and hobbling the judicial process in the process.

It is effectively intimidation of the entire judiciary, who are, when all is said and done, ordinary people who have to depend on their jobs for a living.

If this happens, then where will you or I, the ordinary citizen stand?

Included in the attack on CJ Sharma is a statement allegedly made by him to the British QC retained to represent the State in the Vijay Naraynsingh matter.

This when they were travel fellows on an aircraft, not within the confines of a Court or office of the Hall of Justice even.

If the CJ had no right to voice personal (or even legal) opinion to specialised people (not the populace in general note) in either of the two matters under consideration, what gives PM Manning the right to voice his publicly pray?

Card players would say that PM Manning’s hand has, after the latest thwarted attempted arrest of the CJ, the third in some five days, been revealed by the statement attributed to him in the Express, that “I have to consult the Cabinet before making any move on this matter” and is confirmation, as is his delayed trip to Africa, of both who is calling the shots and of political interference at the highest level.

Why is the Prime Minister (not even DPP or AG) contemplating interference in a police matter?

This after having already put his foot in it by offering the CJ the option of resignation before investigation!

Taken to its logical conclusion this means that both ends of our judicial system are under attack at the same time since if the CJ is being taken down, who is a policeman to buck the big man?

Do not forget that this is the one who was prepared to institute a state of emergency to get his own way previously.

We are surely the only country on record with a state of emergency instituted to arrest a woman, Speaker of the House though she may have been.

That should be a warning -- and do not forget that they have just paved the way to controlling the County Councils and are already handpicking aldermen, mayors and chairmen, the PM having conveniently delayed local government elections for no good reason.

It is unrealistic to believe that the CJ would not interact, or even offer legal opinion, in the course of his duties with those under his command and care hearing matters, particularly those of wider public interest than others; although each and every citizen is entitled to the same level of consideration as the next, regardless of social or economic status.

The alternative is why do we have a CJ, one to head the judiciary?

Is it then a meaningless position, one for a yes man who will carry out the wishes of Mr. Big, whoever he is?

It is to be hoped that neither the position of Chief Justice nor President is permitted to be reduced to this.

They are paid to work for the god of the country, not any one particular individual or group.

Our constitution clearly separates the judicial from the administrative arm, for very good reason.

Is the average citizen aware of the implications herein for each and every one of us?

The recent ruling in the Maha Sabha appeal makes this all the more critical, since it emerged, despite public (unsigned) disclaimers to the contrary, that vital evidence was withheld from the courts and even the State’s own counsel in that matter.

This is not indicative of good or clean, upright governance -- rather, the contrary.

Independence of the judiciary and the police are all that stand between democracy and effective dictatorship in any democratic society.

It is to be hoped that our judiciary will use every avenue available to them to take this matter to outside legal bodies and thwart this blatant intrusion and abuse of our democratic process and we the citizens of TnT had best recognise that the time for apathy is long since past.

Take a look at Zimbabwe or Haiti -- is that the way you want to go? -- and some would even say that there is a Mongoose gang in waiting, already well recompensed and equipped at taxpayers expense ready to swat any that get in the way.

There would then be no rule of law and order.

Remember Grenada under Gairy and the consequences?

We have got to be prepared to stand up and be counted and say no publicly and loudly on this matter.

Our hour of decision is at hand.

Even if we are faced with an infighting (or outfighting) opposition -- it is at least opposition to dictatorship.

Take also into consideration that serious charges have been levelled at the present administration by Abu Bakr and Vernon Paul which have not been receiving the level of attention that the CJ matter nor prosecution of opposition members has.

(How many even remember this?)

Recognise that a bastion of our very democracy is at stake.

Basdeo Panday caused a furore when he stated that “politics has its own morality”.

We are indeed seeing evidence of this today under those selected on grounds of “morality, spirituality and the rule of law”.

Was his statement viewed in too narrow a context perhaps?

TnT is at a critical crossroads -- which way do we go?

Never have we needed prayer, faith and personal integrity more than we do today.

In the interim it should be noted that travel advisories from the UK have gone beyond cautioning merely on crime, but have been updated to include warnings on healthcare, road carnage and an upsurge of haemorrhagic dengue.

Strangely they omitted another return constant threat with heavy rain under the PNM -- flooding!

Murder continues to escalate unchecked (blimps notwithstanding), the cost of living is spiralling upwards and unemployment is only contained within reasonable levels by schemes such as URP and CEPEP, which cannot be maintained out of an oil boom.

Does this really say that anything has improved under the returned PNM?

THE EDITOR:
OUR Attorney General John Jeremie recently went to great lengths to “explain” to the nation that no one is above the law including the country’s Chief Justice Sat Sharma.

His contention is that it is just plain wrong for the CJ to sit as Head of the Judicial and Legal Services Commission and CJ while these charges (trumped-up or not) are pending.

Besides the AG, several hitherto unknown commentators have vented their views, conveniently, at this so-called unheard of criminal abuse of the legal system by the CJ. Firstly, I’ll like to know where these obscure constitutional spokespersons were over the past four years?

Prior to March 2003, this writer (and one or two others) wrote our views on the appointment of then Minister of National Security, Howard Chin Lee.

He was being put in charge of an admittedly corrupt police service that had an ongoing police inquiry into him and his company due to the death of a Trinidad and Tobago Electricity Commission (TTEC) linesman.

This investigation was then being conducted by police officers who, in the middle of their investigation, were being handed a new line minister, Chin Lee.

A strange coincidence?

Did PM Patrick Manning and the AG not see the conflict then that they see now with the CJ sitting as head of the Judiciary while a charge is pending against him?

One notable difference in this case is that the CJ he was not appointed after accusations. There was no hue and cry about the clear implications of impropriety in 2002 and the aftermath when a favoured member of the ruling class and party financier was handed the possible means of interfering in his own case to obtain an outcome that would suit him.

Thereafter, because of his youth, inexperience and total unsuitability for the job of Minister of National Security, the crime situation in this country escalated to unimaginable proportions, probably never to return to the relatively peace we once knew.

Any professional analyst will tell you that it is way easier to keep a crime situation under control before it gets out of hand rather than to clean it up after the fact, so besides the improper appointment a nation underwent massive convulsions.

Since 2002, the executive have made several moves that show that they are the ones who have no respect for the Rule of Law and the Constitution. Several court actions have gone against the government for illegally attempting to dismiss employees, illegal interferences in promotions, interfering in granting of licenses and more. In fact, it would be safe to say that the courts of TnT have stymied the executive in many ways from carrying out their (private) agenda.

In fact, a number of matters have not even reached the courts including how the PM intercepted an appointment letter addressed to the Police Commissioner and the release of the Bajan fisherman for starters.

Is it, for example, worst for the CJ to try to stave off an impeachment (using legal manoeuvers) than for a PM to refuse to send security forces to remove Muslimeen members from State lands (allegedly from stealing aggregate) that the government itself puts hundreds of millions of dollars, even though he was informed in Parliament for years and similarly reported in the media?

So, those who are suddenly concerned must really ask themselves who has proved themselves to be the real threat to the rule of law.

No, we do not need an Executive President with more powers to run amok.

What we need is a new Constitution that will tell us how to remove a PM/President from office if/when he breaks the law.