“… trust that this book will contribute to a lasing respect for the rule of law and fundamental human rights, and freedoms,…” Sir Brian Alleyne, stated in this foreword on Dr. Francis Alexis’ Eastern Caribbean Supreme Courts’ (ECSC) publication, Model Regional Court. As then Acting Chief Justice of the ECSC, Sir Brian expressed his pride at being associated with the book dated October 2007.
Allow me to reference the expressions of Dr. Alexis on the issue of Election Jurisdiction, page 215, he writes, “…The High Court shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine questions as to membership of parliament, on application by an eligible person.” According to Dominica’s Constitution Order Chapter 1:01 Section 40 the Constitution explicitly provides the High Court jurisdiction to hear and determine questions of Membership in Parliament. Furthermore the courts’ procedure is by way of Election Petition and as stated in Attorney General v David it clearly states that only an election petition must be used and that all requirements of the law relating to such petition “are to be strictly complied with” in questions of Membership of Parliament.
Consistent to the letter of the Constitution requiring that dual citizenship, if possess, must not be “by virue of his own act, [...] Section 32, the question of the “legitimacy” of the membership in Parliament of the Honorable Prime Minister and his compliance to the basic requirements of the law as it relates to his participation in the electoral process in his native country meets the criteria for the High Court’s Election Jurisdiction. I am however extremely disturbed about the manner extended in which the former jurist, knowing that the matter is before the Court, has insisted on creating a negative perception of the matter in the eyes of the public while being totally disrespectful and dishonorable to his former colleagues.
There is reason to be very concerned about the specific statements made by Sir Brian; as a member of the jurist fraternity, not too long ago retired from ECSC, it is rather unfortunate that he joins a stream of thought that represents the underlying antithesis of his legal profession. His divisive judgemental concluding statements goes against the principles of the common law rights of every individual including the Honorable Prime Minister. According to Dr. Alexis, the rights, interest, and liberties of the Honorable Prime Minister must be upheld as every other citizen of the state, who is duty bound, to provide everyone “an opportunity of a fair hearing before a decision to be taken on a matter adverse to him”.
The question of the membership in Parliament of the Hon. Prime Minister is actually being decided by an immediate past functionary of the court which has not yet convened on the matter and whose current functionaries can be easily perverse in their decision – making process based on the Perception Concept alluded to by Dr. Alexis. Dr. Alexis posits that “it is a perversion of the decision making process for a functionary who has to decide on matters to appear to reasonable persons to have made up his mind before hearing a party to the matter.” I stay without any contradiction that as a decorated retired functionary the utterances of Sir Brian conveys no other than the perception that a ‘bias’ can be sowed among jurists in the Prime Minister’s case.
As the unassuming public we may feel that and further gravitate towards the perception that indeed the Prime Minister has committed an offence requiring his resignation thereby bypassing the need for a proper hearing at the High Court. Moreover Sir Brian’s words serves no other purpose but to prejudice the entire jury system thereby spreading an unfortunate, charlatan bias since he speaks from a position of authority and immediate proximity to the very court system. I am told that he may be a juror to Belize, a member of CARICOM, Appellate Court.
I therefore seek to alert my readers that not only will Sir Brian’s utterances generate the perceived, intentional or not, bias, he is conscientiously spreading ill-will about the eventual outcome of a future High Court case. Sir Brian is imposing his opinion on the court and must be made to understand that such behavior is totally unbecoming. If the Court exonerates the Prime Minister he has already sown a seed of disbelief in the judiciary's ability to act fairly and thereby sensitizing further views of some fictitious court interference in the matters of the Court and vice versa, thereby placing the enter judiciary and the country in a no-win situation and in disrepute.
For me I find it in poor taste when men with guarded responsibility flirt such responsibility triggering a real danger to the integrity of the court thereby allowing anyone including the Honorable Prime Minister as citizens of the Commonwealth of Dominica subject to the “danger of bias”! Sir Brian knows that his words have significant influence otherwise he would have limited his comments on outcomes of similar cases as in St.Kitts or Grenada thereby enshrining the precept that everyone must be provided a fair hearing with little or no suspicion of bias.
To state that the Honorable Prime Minister deliberately mislead the public is no more than a personal attack which is highly unscrupulous and unfitting of the office you once held or perhaps still holds Sir Brian.
Abhor-able Brian, dishonorable words Brian, worst it is extremely un-Christ like. Please, your role is to teach us, it is no longer to decide for us - so step down your high horses and act responsibly I beseech you servant of the law!
No comments:
Post a Comment