Skip to main content

Merry Go Round Clowns

Initially, the position of the government and the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) was that:
  • The MOU"S breached the constitutional rights of Jamaican people;
  • The MOU's were legally invalid as the provisions were in conflict with the laws of Jamaica;
  • Dr. Peter Phillips secretly and without the requisite authority entered into such agreements (MOU1 & MOU2) with agencies of the US government (DEA, CIA, FBI) 

Curiously, in the Manatt Commission of Enquiry, the JLP had distinct and separate legal representation from Prime Minister Bruce Golding. The JLP, through its attorney Frank Phipps QC, maintained the position that the MOU's facilitated the breach of the citizens' constitutional rights.

PM Golding's attorney, Hugh Small QC, seemed at times to be lending support to this seemingly principled position.

The PNP's attorney Senator K.D. Knight QC. brought to the attention of the COE Prime Minister Golding's admission in Parliament that the current government of Jamaica "wholeheartedly endorsed" the MOU's.  Surprise, surprise!

Security Minister Nelson testified that he supported the PM's assertion "in principle" but "not the methodology". In short there had been a breach. This is the first time that the objection to the Dudus Extradition Request had been couched in such terms. More surprise was yet to come.

Security Minister Nelson stated that the government was now involved in a process to amend the existing legislation to "legitimize the breach". WOW!

So we have spent much time and taxpayers funds to come full circle.  The seemingly principled position originally adopted has been effectively abandoned, to wit:

  • The sell-out MOU's have been wholeheartedly endorsed and not annulled by this JLP government. 
  • The operational terms of the sell-out have been breached;
  • The breach has been condoned by the government now taking steps to legitimize the breach;
  • The JLP regime is now seeking to perfect the terms and conditions of the "sell-out" ;
The ultimate "breach free" is deeply entrenching such provisions in the Constitution of Jamaica. That will never take place as the JLP is deadly afraid of anything requiring a referendum.

It has generally been accepted that there has been a "Web of Deception". Dr. Peter Phillips used the phrase as early as March 24, 2010.  SG. Douglas Leys has adopted the phrase to describe the events. The Manatt COE will now have to identify the Chief Spider. The "Web of Deception" would seem to involve some agreement among more than one and actions taken in furtherance of such agreement.  In short a conspiracy to deceive

However, the most recent revelations give rise to the suspicion that there has been deliberate usage of state financial resources ($40 million ) to undertake an investigation - the futility of which is indisputable. In short, a conspiracy to defraud.

There have been media reports raising concerns that high priced QC's  have been employed at taxpayer's expense. The selection of the attorneys has not been transparent.  Why would experienced attorneys need legal representation when they are merely called upon to give an accurate account of what actually took place?

It makes little or no sense to be investigating the legality and ethics of memoranda that have been "wholeheartedly endorsed", fully recognized and faithfully implemented by the current JLP regime. Irrespective of the findings of this Manatt COE, the JLP regime has started the process of "legitimizing the breach"; not specifically and unambiguously outlawing the breach. So making the breach legitimate apparently no longer signs away the citizens' constitutional rights". 

Hence more of the actions (once classified as breach) will continue but with legal lubricated conduits - utilizing the terminology adopted by the PM himself.

At the end of this COE, cotton candy should be distributed to the participants. Its character expecially its texture aptly captures the lack of substance of this enquiry.. Cotton candy after all is the customary treat at circuses - irrespective of the cost.  This would be a fitting tribute to a bunch of clowns!!

Comments

Anonymous said…
Hi there,

I have a inquiry for the webmaster/admin here at drpaulashley.blogspot.com.

May I use part of the information from your post above if I give a link back to this website?

Thanks,
Alex

Popular posts from this blog

Appealing the By-Election Order

Abraham Dabdoub's appeal against the Chief Justice's ruling can be divided into two overlapping and intertwined phases: That the Chief Justice erred in law by failing to award the seat to the only duly nominated candidate on Nomination Day, August 7, 2007 in the constituency of West Portland; and That the Chief Justice erred in law by failing to recognize and properly apply the distinction between " status " and " conduct " in coming to her decision on disqualification based on dual citizenship. Numerous cases on votes being declared to be "thrown away" and the next candidate being duly seated by the court are cited. The detailed submissions are set out below: Publish at Scribd or explore others: Law

Communication Error!

Jamaica Gleaner Contributor, Martin Henry has written an interesting article entitled “Victory for the rule of law” published on Sunday, April 20, 2008 . In his last paragraph Henry stated: " A troubled citizen's concerns about the legitimacy of laws passed in the past with the participation of MPs who may have been in Daryl Vaz's dual-allegiance position was published as The Letter of the Day by The Gleaner last Wednesday [April 16]. Lawyer Dr Paul Ashley made a great deal out of the same issue when we both appeared on the TV programme Impact on that same day. The Constitution dissolves these fears in the wisely anticipatory provision of Section 51 (2): "The presence or participation of any person not entitled to be present or to participate in the proceedings of the House shall not invalidate those proceedings." Interpreting legal provisions is an exercise fraught with dangers, especially if one is not acquainted with the rules governing interpretation. Without...

By-Election Predisposition

Introduction A massive amount of time and resources have been devoted to the issue of the course to be properly taken once a victorious electoral candidate has been found to be "disqualified" under S. 40 of the Constitution of Jamaica. Simply put, the crux of the matter is whether the second place candidate should, without more, be accorded the seat by the court; or that the said election be deemed null and void and a by-election ordered to decide the people's representative. This matter consumed inordinate amounts of energy - judicial and otherwise - due primarily to the silence of the Constitution on what recourse should be adopted in such circumstance. A cardinal tenet of democratic government is that the people must decide their representatives and not a select grouping - no matter their qualification or status. The Constitution of Jamaica fully recognized this imperative even though it expressly delegates the determination of questions as to membership of either Ho...