Granger defends appointment of sitting Judge as Senior Counsel

President David Granger on Wednesday defended his move to appoint sitting Judge Roxane George to the post of Senior Counsel, noting that her appointment should have happened a long time ago.

Justice Roxane George was among seven other senior lawyers who were elevated to the status of Senior Counsel on Wednesday, receiving their commissions of appointment from President Granger.
The appointments were done amid protest by the political Opposition, particularly against President Granger‘s move to have Justice George, a sitting Judge, be granted the status.
President Granger, however, defended his decision, nothing that George, a very qualified and experienced candidate, should have been elevated a long time now.
“She served for years in the Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecutions. If this was a normal jurisdiction during those years she would have had the SC long ago,” the Head of State told reporters.
The Opposition’s shadow Legal Affairs Minister and Attorney General, Anil Nandlall had argued earlier that the appointment of a sitting Judge ran contrary to every canon of practice and precedent which dictate that Senior Counsels must be practising lawyers. He said it was for that reason that the Chief Justice of Trinidad and Tobago, Ivor Archie, was forced to relinquish his appointment as Senior Counsel since he was a Judge and not a practising lawyer when he was appointed.
Justice George had told the media on Wednesday that she had applied for the status since 2003. She said there was a list in 2014 and she was surprised that her name was still there. Her selection, she said, came as a total surprise, since years have passed.
According to Nandlall, the same was obtained when Kamla Persaud-Bissessar was appointed Senior Counsel while being Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago.
Nandlall outlined that one of the persons appointed has never done a case of substance at the Bar. He went on too to question the rationale behind the omission of certain individuals, which, he said, was glaring.
“On what basis was the current DPP, Shalimar Ali-Hack, omitted? As irregular as I believe it is for a Judge to be appointed, on what basis one was Judge appointed and the other Judges not, especially the Chancellor and Chief Justice?” asked the former Legal Affairs Minister.
Furthermore, Nandall enquired of the consultations done by the coalition Government and/or President Granger in making the appointments, while adding that the slide into authoritarianism by this Administration was moving faster than anticipated.