General T&T, Law, Media

Ramesh backs probe on CJ

12 Comments

Newsday
December 26, 2017 – newsday.co.tt

Chief Justice Ivor ArchieFormer attorney general Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj SC supports the Law Association’s probe of misconduct allegations against Chief Justice Ivor Archie, adding his voice to calls from lawyers and former judges who believe there is a case for Archie to answer.

Maharaj said he supports a two-member committee of senior counsels appointed by the Law Association to advise on if section 137 of the Constitution which addresses the grounds for invoking a tribunal a Chief Justice can be applied against Archie. The CJ is said to have proposed to judges the use of a private security firm a friend of his works for, and for recommending people for public housing. In a recent statement, Archie confirmed seeking help for deserving people for housing but stated the provision of security falls under state approved agencies. Agreeing with the Law Association, Maharaj told Newsday yesterday, before going abroad, he commented on the matter in his address at the association’s annual dinner at Hilton Trinidad, St Ann’s on December 1.

Reissuing his speech, Maharaj told attorneys the association had a duty to ensure the allegations are investigated.

Maharaj had reminded the attorneys of Privy Council member Lord Hodge’s statements last year that judges must avoid lobbying public officials for their own interest or the interest of people they knew. Quoting the law lord, Maharaj said, “The judiciary has a duty to correct misunderstandings of matters which are published to the public because the rule of law is based ultimately on public confidence in the judiciary.”

Justices Carol Gobin and Ronnie Boodoosingh are judges who have publicly called on Archie to respond to the allegations, although a group of judges, in an advertisement which did not disclose their names, published in Newsday, stood by the CJ saying he never proposed a private firm to provide security to members of the Judiciary. Maharaj reminded Newsday that he told the attorneys they must speak out against when there is public perception that the Judiciary may be compromised.

“When the judge does not satisfactorily answer the published allegations made against him and he does not cooperate with the law association or the legal profession in providing satisfactory explanations to the published allegations made against him, the legal profession has a duty to the public and to the legal profession to take action to ensure that those published allegations against the judge are investigated in accordance with provisions of the Constitution,” Maharaj said. Former chief justices Satnarine Sharma and Clinton Bernard over the weekend called on Archie to directly address the allegations. Archie has been abroad on private business in the past week.

Source: http://newsday.co.tt/2017/12/26/ramesh-backs-probe-on-cj/

12 thoughts on “Ramesh backs probe on CJ”

  1. Time for Archie to go. Every month he is galavanting all over the globe on tax payers dollars. Now the issue with the criminal element supported by him. Time to go.

  2. When high ranking officials in society talk down to the citizens we need them to answer to us. We hear statements such as “i will travel as i want”. There is no accountability by high ranking officials in Trinidad. We the people needs all officials to give us the services for which we pay so highly.

  3. NIPOTISM, continues to be rampant in Trinidad, and it seems that Justice ARCHIE must have just about fallen into the trap dug in by his own self. In this volatile political atmosphere of Trinidad, pressure must be put on high ranking individuals to answer all accusations, and the Chief Justice is not exempted. Trinidad have a history, of Elected and established officials flaunting their positions, there is always the right price accepted by all members, from uniform to jacket and tie. The lack of integrity and public moralism existing in Trinidad, and the Slave and Indentured Island chain called the Caribbean, shows a people evolving slowly from being treated as Animals, to sub-Humane and now, semi-civil, some of us just need to sit back with a clean clear mind, to comprehend the havoc that entails. Do we have corrupt individuals in the Judiciary? you can bet on it, at the end of the day, we will all come to the realization that you can take a MAN/WOMAN from the gutter, but you can’t take the gutter out of them, you see, the dept of ones knowledge, dictates the size of HIS/HER reality. There is a IGBO proverb that says “IF YOU DON’T TRAIN YOUR MONKEY NOW, WHEN IT TURNS INTO A GORILLA YOU IN TROUBLE” The Proof of Behavior, is not what you say, but what you do. Explain yourself Chief Justice Archie.

  5. I find this persecution of Chief Justice Archie objectionable. The judiciary in this country is rotten to the core, it is the one profession that lacks professionalism. If we are to call to account the many incidents of misbehavior by officers of the court, there will be too many to query. One of the charges leveled against him was him recommending people for housing units. If that is so offensive why is it so prevalent by ministers of government, parliamentarians, lawyers, doctors, top civil servants and generally people who swore to uphold the law?
    If these charges are not yet proven, why is the media being used as a court of law? To me this is a case of the pot calling the kettle ‘black’. Gerald Ramdeen, one of the early accusers, has had so many cases of impropriety published against him, but till this day there is no call for him being called to account. There is the case of him getting documents from the office of the Chief Justice; there is another of him holding money awarded to his dead client until it was reported by the media. Aren’t these behavior of impropriety? Why not call him before disciplinary committees of the law association?

    I believe the law fraternity in this country lack integrity. It is rife with politics, corruption and racism. People like Ramlogan, Mendonca and others get away with serious lapses of behavior while others are called into question. If the law is followed in every instance, there would be at least some semblance of integrity. But the lapses in how it is dealt with in the media is totally unjustified. I share no confidence in Archie per se but I’, tired of the double standard.

    1. Miss step after miss step. He had that problem with Ayers resulting in 52 cases being restarted. He travels all over spending millions in tax payer dollars. He has not done anything to reduce the huge back log of cases. Now he is known to have links with the criminal elements.

      But he is your God Kian. You come here to worship at his footstool.

  6. It seems that the allegations levied at the CJ are morphing daily and makes one wonder what the parameters of the investigations being conducted by the Law Association could be based upon considering the ever evolving allegations. You have to keep a scorecard to keep up with the daily ‘revelations’, some which are engaging the attentions of the police therefore the Law Associate’s investigation would be premature!

    I can’t help but wonder if the alleged ‘paramour’ wasn’t a man would this hunt be on? Would these Judicial Officers be so emboldened if they didn’t calculate, neigh depend on the perceived scandalizing nature of the allegation maker?

    Are we willing to ‘drag’ the Office of the Chief Justice because of the alleged sexuality of the Office Holder? Seems like a ludicrous question but day by day it is appearing that way.

    http://www.cnc3.co.tt/news/dillian-johnson-claims-have-evidence-relationship-cj

    1. A very interesting question raised here Danielle. I raise this based on what I may consider on par is the holder of one of the most powerful office i.e. the US President. In this case it is not on sexuality of the holder of the office but the sheer frequent stupidity espoused by the beholder of this office. To ‘save face’, Trump is trying to muzzle Bannon by using the instrument of the law.

      http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42559436

  8. The ‘allegations’ against the Chief Justice seems to be a fishing expedition. It is very clear where the Chief Justice’s accusers seem to going with their stories. They are supposed to be ‘professional’ in the way they comport themselves but it seems more like the National Enquirer presenting a story for mainstream press to follow. There might very well be reason for concerns, be it social or ethical about the Chief Justice’s behavior, but the way they (the law association, the media and Indian law professionals) is a case study in mounting pressure to unseat a sitting the CJ. Headlines like “CJ’s FRIEND” is codified to say something more than just being a ‘friend’. The insistence by the Law Association to meet to discuss “rumors”, also tell a story. Worst yet, is the perpetual crusade by Israel Khan to push out the Chief Justice, lends to some juicy gossips that will eventually unseat the CJ. What I am saying here, is that when professionals behave in accordance with their perceived stature, they can present a professional case for public consumption. But the steady flow of innuendos and suppositions from law fraternity individuals make the case sound more like mauve langue than an honest effort to seek redress about the professional behavior of Justice Archie. My intention here is not to support Archie or to belittle the individuals. I am concerned about preserving the stature of the judiciary and how it should operate. If there is cause for some kind of investigation of the Chief Justice, then a select committee should present a professional appraisal of whatever wrongs the CJ is committing or has committed and present it to the appropriate panel for investigation and further action.

    Mr. Israel Khan is looking like a clown with his antics in trying to ‘expose’ the chief Justice. He is in effect adding speculation about motives more than truly wanting to know what is wrong in the CJ’s Office. I find it nauseating with the antics of Israel Khan, Gerald Ramdeen and others who, as members of the cloth have ‘committed’ many unsavory acts of unethical behavior that it shames in contrast to what they want us to believe of the CJ. This is not to say that aspersions cannot be pointed at the CJ. He may very well have, in his private life, behavior not expected of accepted by the greater population, but these men pf the cloth are behaving too much like cheer leaders than men who truly want to get to the truth. This is disgusting behavior and should not be tolerated.

Comments are closed.