Skip to main content

Tivoli COE: 3-month enquiry lasts 14 months



The Report of the Tivoli COE is expected around mid-April, some two (2) months after the end of the public hearings. Those public hearings took place over some fourteen (14) calendar months.
The Terms of Reference (TOR) of the Western Kingston Commission of Enquiry states iner alia:

2. The Commission shall use its best efforts to conclude its enquiry within three (3) months after it commences, and shall make a full and faithful report on and recommendations concerning the aforesaid matters, and transmit the same to His Excellency the Most Honourable Governor General, within two (2) months after concluding its enquiry.” 

Obviously there was the expectation that the public hearing would have lasted some three (3) consecutive calendar months from the date of commencement baring any unavoidable and unforeseeable delays. Similarly the Report should be submitted to the Governor- General within two (2) consecutive calendar months of concluding of its enquiry, baring any unavoidable and unforeseeable delays.

The Chairman of the Commission from very early in the exercise realized there was a problem in respect of the number of potential witnesses primarily from the security forces and the residents of Tivoli Gardens. An attempt was then made to cull the list of potential witness thereby calling those who would have added something to the evidence already adduced and to focus the testimonies on the particulars of the TOR.
Such attempts met with mixed results as both Attorneys and witnesses paid little or no regard to the strictures that the Chairman tried to impose. Being televised and rebroadcast there was added sensitivity not to be potrayed as limiting the evidence or unduly restricting the strategy of the attorneys.

The Chairman then resorted to an unusual (albeit practical) interpretation of the TOR by:
(i) inferring that the three months should not be taken to mean three consecutive calendar months;
(ii) that the three(3) months meant in fact ninety (90) non- consecutive working days .

That interpretation allowed the Chairman free reign to conduct the hearings at any period of time primarily, but not exclusively, at his convenience . There seems to have been serious underlying problems faced by the Commission Secretariat which severely impacted the logistics. (see our Tivoli COE: Impractical timelines)

In his concluding remarks the Chairman sought to justify his interpretation arguing that the tasks assigned could not have been completed within the time frame specified in the TOR.
Interestingly, and possibly not consistent with his unusual interpretation of the duration of the enquiry, he promised that the Commissioners would use their best efforts to submit the Report within the two (2) months specified. The expectation is that it will be two (2) consecutive calendar months and not sixty(60) non-consecutive working days.

It is untenable for a 3-month enquiry to last some 14 months due to the interpretation of it being 90 non-consecutive working days.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Declaration" Not "Determination"

Both the Prime Minister and the Speaker of the House of Representatives have conveniently confused calls for declaration of citizenship status by Members of either House with the determination of questions as to membership of either House. The Chief Justice of Jamaica has determined that individuals who have renewed their US passports and travelled thereon are disqualified from being validly elected or appointed as a Member of either House. Proponents of the impotence of the Speaker, in the matter of requiring a declaration by individual members, have sought to rely on Section 44 (1) of the Constitution which states: Any question whether - a. any person has been validly elected or appointed as a member of either House; or b. any member of either House has vacated his seat therein or is required, under the provisions of subsection (3) or subsection (4) of section 41 of this Constitution, to cease to exercise any of his functions as a member, shall be determined by the Supreme Court ...

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...

DEA: Book Review #1

Three book reviews of   "Dudus: The Extradition of Jamaica's #1 Drug Don" have been published; two in The Jamaica Observer and one in the Jamaica Gleaner. The first was by Rev Dr. Devon Dick entitled 'Devon Dick | Dudus Revisited By Dr Paul Ashley ' published in the Jamaica Gleaner Thursday, September 13, 2018: "Recently, Dr Paul Ashley, attorney-at-law and political commentator, published Dudus: The Extradition of Jamaica's #1 Drug Don, 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, Ashley went to primary sources and published transcripts from both the Manatt, Phelps and Phillips and West Kingston commissions of enquiry. There are such documents scattered over the seven chapters. Ashley provides an overview of this watershed 2010 event then examines the confidentiality breach, the delay...