Dear Editor,
Recently, the President of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), Mr Adrian Saunders, at a public lecture delivered in Guyana, encouraged Guyanese to write public commentaries critical of decisions of the CCJ.
His Honour obviously recognises that the right to criticise decisions of the courts is part and parcel of the freedom of expression guaranteed to us as a fundamental right by the Constitution.
Needless to say, there is a distinction between criticising and being disrespectful. Unlike Attorney General Mr. Basil Williams, I am conscious of this distinction, and bear it in mind in my public comments in relation to the recent ruling of the Guyana Court of Appeal.
I read the news article of the AG’s recent press statement accusing me of being disrespectful of our judges. In that press release, he deceptively plucked certain statements I made out of context in order to make his point, including statements that I made in and to the Court. The fact that I was permitted to make those statements in the Court ought to establish that the Court itself did not find them offensive, obviously having regard to the context in which they were made. That is why the AG deliberately excluded the context in his Release.
For example, I said that the Barbadian Queen’s Counsel were alien to the historical evolution of, and political vicissitudes which inspired, Article 161 (2) of the Constitution to its current form. The AG accuses me of labelling these two gentlemen as “aliens”!
I specifically deny describing the Court’s decision as “political”. What I said and wrote were widely carried in the press, and anyone is free to examine it for themselves. That my written comments were carried by the press unedited is evidence that the press did not consider them scandalous; since, by carrying them, the press itself would have been implicated in the scandal.
I must wonder why the AG would want to remind the nation about his disgraceful conduct before Justice Franklin Holder. But since he has made reference to it, it is apt that I remind that, among the several disrespectful statements made to that judge, he informed the court: “The last man who said that to me was a magistrate who was later found dead!” The Judge immediately rose from the bench and exited the courtroom. This was followed by a letter of complaint written by the Judge to the Chief Justice, and a letter sent by the Chancellor to the President, complaining about the AG’s conduct before Justice Holder. These letters were all made public, and were widely carried in the press.
Only recently, the nation witnessed how this very AG refused to obey an Order of Chief Justice Roxanne George to bring the Judicial Review Act into force, and complied with the Order of Court only when Contempt of Court proceedings were filed against him. I can cite more instances of flagrant disrespect of the Judiciary by this AG, but I think the point is made already.
In conclusion, while I was critical of the Court’s decision, as I have right to do, I did not disrespect any judge. In any event, the AG lacks the moral and professional authority to lecture me, or anyone else for that matter, about professional legal conduct.
Respectfully,
Anil Nandlall
