Skip to main content

The Coat of Surreal: Not Ready

On Friday, February 27. 2009, the Court of Appeal announced it's decision in the Dabdoub v. Vaz appeals devoid of a written reasoned judgement.

Politically, the notion of the people deciding who shall represent them in Parliament, is incontestable. The mobilization of the political party's electoral machinery has untold beneficial effects for constitutents as it is at election time that politicians are forced to "pay" special attention to the needs of the people.

Legally, there are a number of serious concerns:
  • We have a Constitution and have accepted the notion of the Rule of Law;
  • The courts are the enforcers of the Constitution and the Rule of Law;
  • The courts' decisions must reflect this unique mandate and be open to public scrutiny;
Obviously, the Court of Appeal was not ready to hand down a written reasoned judgement. The unavoidable question is:

What factors determined this announcement at this time?

For a matter dealing with the Constitution of Jamaica (the supreme law of the land) and the Composition of Parliament -which could have devastating implications for the government -to have taken so long (approximately 18 months) is totally unacceptable.

For the judges of the Court of Appeal (the final arbiter in such election petition matters) to announce a decision which has implications for other pending cases without written reasoning is inexcusable.

We humbly submit that this is not a complex matter necessitating countless hours of cerebral exertion. Both sides presented copious arguments and researched the gamut of case authorities. Moreover, the Chief Justice had handed down a written, reasoned judgement - a judgement which the Court of Appeal upheld.

To come now and just announce the dismissal of the appeals and the upholding of the Chief Justice's ruling is:
  • woefully insufficient;
  • unworthy of a learned tribunal;
  • further accelerates the erosion of public confidence in the judiciary;
  • adds substance to the case for the retention of the Privy Council.
To promise delivery of the reasons in writing within two weeks adds further insult to the contemptuous in jury. Why not wait two weeks before making any announcement and deliver the much-awaited reasoning? What difference would 14 more days make to a process that to date has exceeded 510? Did political considerations influence the timing of this announcement?

Small societies are especially vulnerable to rumours, allegations wild speculations and suss. Court decisions that have far reaching political consequences are always open to charges of political interference, undue influence, discussions of the percieved political loyalties of the judges concerned and a formidable grist for the mill of conspiracy theorists. Regrettably the Court of Appeal on this occasion seemed oblivious to this reality. It did itself an injustice.

With due respect.

Comments

Anonymous said…
One is likely to conclude that the outcome was predetermined in a telephone conversation,prior to the court hearings. It smells

Popular posts from this blog

Dudus:The Extradition Of Jamaica's #1 Drug Don

We have posted the 3 book reviews that have been published in the Jamaican newspapers. There is now available on Youtube an interview done in late 2018. Below is the introduction by Angry People Smiling: "Dr Paul Ashley, Attorney-at-Law and Political Commentator, published Dudus: The Extradition of Jamaica's #1 Drug Don, a book which recounts the "Machinations of the Government of Jamaica (GOJ) to delay and frustrate the extradition of Jamaica's premier drug lord, Christopher 'Dudus' Coke." To achieve that goal, Dr Ashley went to primary sources and published transcripts from both, the Manatt, Phelps and Phillips and West Kingston Commissions of Enquiry. Documents are scattered over the seven chapters. Dr Ashley provides an overview of this watershed 2010 event then examines the confidentiality breach, the delays and tactics, the machinations of both the governments of Jamaica and USA, and finally, the escape and capture of Dudus, who was wanted t

DEA: Book Review #3

The third book review of "Dudus: The Extradition of Jamaica's #1 Drug Don" was by Dr. Canute Thompson under the caption "Naming politicians who 'hug up' criminals' published in The Jamaica Observer , Monday, December 03, 2018: "Young, outspoken, feisty, up-and-coming Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) heavyweight Matthew Samuda has threatened to name politicians who are “hugging up” criminals. Should Samuda follow through on his threat (promise) — and I doubt he will — Jamaica would surely benefit. And so, for Jamaica's sake, I urge Samuda to do as he has promised. But, even if he does not do so publicly, I suggest that he provides the report, with the evidence he has, to the police. Samuda's threat has led me to reflect on a recent book written by Dr Paul Ashley — a feisty and outspoken socio-political provocateur, cynic, and attorney-at-law. The book is entitled Dudus: The Extradition of Jamaica's # 1 Drug Don. This book may provide some

DEA: Book Review. #2

The second book review of "Dudus: The Extradition of Jamaica's #1 Drug Don" was by Allan Douglas published in   The Jamaica Observer, Monday, October 01, 2018 entitled 'The extradition of Dudus': "I have just finished reading Dr Paul Ashley's book, Dudus: The Extradition of Jamaica's #1 Drug Don, a seven-chapter, 176-page scholarly work recording a significant event in Jamaica's history. It is very unfortunate the book will not be available for sale at bookstores or other outlets, but will only be accessible from libraries. In my opinion, the author could have spent more time researching the main character, Christopher “Dudus” Coke, and providing more details about him. To understand this character properly he must be placed in context. The book needed greater elaboration of his personal life — his boyhood days, the loves and influences that made him the person he became. One was left to rely on American intelligence reports that lacked substa