Home / View Point / Guest Columns / Dear Editor: Ex-PNM general secretary knocks Justice Saunders for criticising T&T govt over CCJ

Dear Editor: Ex-PNM general secretary knocks Justice Saunders for criticising T&T govt over CCJ

“One would have expected that as a Judge, Mr. Saunders would have checked his facts before making a pronouncement on the Government of Trinidad and Tobago, because if he did, he would have found that the failure of this country to be part of the CCJ lies with the opposition United National Congress (UNC).”

In the following Letter to the Editor, ex-PNM general secretary Ashton Ford knocks Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) president, Justice Adrian Saunders, and the media for criticising the Trinidad and Tobago government’s failure to use the CCJ—rather than the “UNC-led Trinidad and Tobago government”:

Photo: Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) president Justice Adrian Saunders.
(Courtesy IWNSVG)

It is unfortunate that the newly appointed President of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), Mr Justice Adrian Saunders, has bowled off the beginning of his tenure with a wide ball.

He missed the mark when he expressed “disappointment with the reluctance of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago to have the institution as its final court of appeal.”

One would have expected that as a Judge, Mr Saunders would have checked his facts before making a pronouncement on the Government of Trinidad and Tobago, because if he did, he would have found that the failure of this country to be part of the CCJ lies with the opposition United National Congress (UNC).

For the benefit of Mr Saunders and others who have wrongly accused the current PNM administration of being responsible for the delay in joining the CCJ, let me outline the historical facts on this matter:

Photo: Former Trinidad and Tobago prime minister Basdeo Panday (right) shares a joke with then Cuba president Fidel Castro during the closing ceremony of a CARIFORUM meeting in 1998.
(Copyright AFP 2014/Roberto SCchmidt)
  1. In 1999, then Prime Minister Basdeo Panday announced that the Government of Trinidad and Tobago would provide a site to house the Court, and the Heads of Government approved the establishment of the CCJ.
  2. On 14 February 2001, the agreement establishing the CCJ was signed by Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, St Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago. By 2003, Dominica and St Vincent signed on, to make a total of 12 signatories.
  3. The CCJ was inaugurated on 16 April 2005, at a ceremony in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago.
  4. In 2002, the Government of Trinidad and Tobago changed, and the UNC became the official opposition in Parliament, with Basdeo Panday as the Leader of the Opposition.
  5. The new Government, led by the PNM, announced that it would proceed with the decision for T&T to join the CCJ, but was unable so to do because of strenuous objections from Panday and his UNC party, who then called for a referendum to settle the matter.
  6. Because the PNM-led Government could not get the required majority in the House of Representatives to approve the legislation to join the CCJ, the matter remained in abeyance.
  7. The situation remained unresolved until 2010 when another general election took place and a new Government was installed under Prime Minister Mrs Kama Persad-Bissessar who maintained the position taken by her predecessor Panday of not supporting T&T joining the CCJ.
  8. In his column in the Trinidad Guardian on 30 May 2018, under the headline “CCJ Tantrums” Wesley Gibbings stated, “We recall, for instance, Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar’s remarkable outburst in 2005 that the court lacked East Indian judges and was therefore unacceptable.”
  9. On 12 April 2012 then Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar made an official statement in the House of Representatives where she gave the country the assurance that “I am pleased to announce that the Government will be bringing the legislation to this Honourable House to secure the abolition of appeals to Privy Council in all criminal matters so that the jurisdiction would then be ceded to the CCJ.”
Photo: Former Prime Minister and current Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar.
(Courtesy Caricom.com)

It is against this background that I take strong objection both to Mr Saunders’s comments, and those of the highly-respected anti-PNM columnist, Ricky Singh, who, in his column in the Express newspaper, under the heading, “Dancing with the CCJ and Caricom…” wrote, “it is more than time for Prime Minister Rowley to get off his political high horse and offer a public explanation as to why he continues to stubbornly access the Privy Council in preference to the CCJ as this nation’s court of last resort.”

Both men conveniently let UNC leaders Panday and Persad-Bissessar off the hook for being responsible for T&T not being a member of the CCJ.

It is plain amazing that the Express newspaper has either forgotten, or is also actively engaged in protecting the UNC from any blame in this situation. In its editorial of 29 May 2018, titled, “The CCJ Question”, it states, “A former Government of T&T campaigned hard and won the fight for the court to be set up in POS. And then turned its back on the commitment to access the court in both its original and its appellate jurisdiction.”

We are truly in deep trouble in our beloved country when facts can be dismissed so easily both by persons who hold high office and a national newspaper, on an important and sensitive issue that ought to have have been settled more than a decade ago.

Distorting history or revising it to suit a particular agenda, will only gift us the terrible consequences of discord and strife, from which some will attempt to benefit, whilst chaos reigns supreme.

Photo: Queen Elizabeth II (left) greets Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley (right) in April 2018.
(Copyright Office of the Prime Minister)

 

About Letters to the Editor

Letters to the Editor
Want to share your thoughts with Wired868? Email us at editor@wired868.com. Please keep your blog between 300 to 800 words and be sure to read it over first for typos and punctuation.

Check Also

Demming: The East Dry River voted PNM for over-40 years and what did they get?

“It’s true that things are always changing, but I expected that some of the change …

6 comments

  1. It is Rowley (and a minister of his affirmed in loud words) in charge now. According to Jack Warner, Rowley would be HNIC and therefore the buck stops with him.

    Even if previous governments were at fault, that lies in the past. Rowley has been there for 3 years and is there for another 2. So it is his responsibility. It is HIS government that makes and shapes policy now.

  2. The author has placed the historical context on public record but stops at 2012 when the UNC was in power. I wonder if he would continue the history lesson and indicate what specific actions have been taken since September 7, 2015. If none, then this Keith Rowley led, PNM Administration has time to right this wrong.

  3. That is exactly my take on this also, Lasana.

    Saunders is not concerned whether it is a PNM or UNC government. As far as he and the outside world is concerned, it is a TT government. It just shows to me how Forde and others are more focused on party over country.

  4. Can we have a binding referendum?

  5. Personally, I don’t blame Saunders for knocking the T&T government. It IS a T&T gov’t in my book. Just like it is a UK and USA gov’t as opposed to a May or Trump govt…

    • That is exactly my take on this also, Lasana.

      Saunders is not concerned whether it is a PNM or UNC government. As far as he and the outside world is concerned, it is a TT government. It just shows to me how Forde and others are more focused on party over country.