Categories
News

BRITAIN SLAMS TURKS AND CAICOS PREMIER’S SPEECH

Britain slams Turks and Caicos premier’s CARICOM speech
Published on March 14, 2013

By Caribbean News Now contributor

LONDON, England — In a strongly worded letter on Tuesday, Britain’s Foreign Secretary William Hague described Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) Premier Dr Rufus Ewing’s speech last month to Caribbean Community (CARICOM) heads of government as a substantial misrepresentation to the people of the TCI and to the leaders of the Caribbean.

Britain’s Foreign Secretary, William Hague
“I have seen the speech you gave to CARICOM heads of government on 18 February about the relationship between the Turks and Caicos Islands and the United Kingdom. I regret to say you substantially misrepresent both the past and the present situation to both the people of the TCI and to the leaders of the Caribbean,” Hague said.

Hague went on to remind Ewing that the previous government run by his Progressive National Party (PNP) “left behind a chaotic situation including — through incompetence, abuse of power and corruption — rapidly deteriorating public finances.”

“As a result, TCI was, in effect, bankrupt. In 2009 the UK government provided emergency funding to enable public workers to be paid. In 2010 we provided a guarantee that enabled the TCI government to borrow up to $260 million at an affordable interest rate in order to enable the government to maintain essential services while bringing public finances back under control,” he continued.

Hague said that Britain accepted broad responsibility for good governance in its Overseas Territories and referred to the 2008-2009 Commission of Inquiry in the TCI, which concluded that there was a high probability of systemic corruption among ministers, members of the legislature and public officials in the then TCI government.

The inquiry documented detailed information on corruption, dishonesty and abuse of public office by former premier Michael Misick and other ministers in the previous PNP government and recommended criminal investigation. As a result, Britain suspended parts of the TCI constitution providing for ministerial government and the House of Assembly.

Subsequent investigations have led to 12 former ministers and others being charged and the attorney general is seeking Misick’s extradition from Brazil to the TCI.

“Misick is resisting return to TCI and seeking political asylum,” Hague said.

He also pointed out that a prominent international law firm was appointed to recover misappropriated assets and has so far recovered $16.6 million, with a further $2.6 million ordered to be paid, as well as nearly 2,500 acres of Crown land recovered; all to benefit the people of the TCI.

The British Interim Administration implemented a broad programme of reform to deal with this situation and to help prevent it being repeated. It established a robust framework for good government and sound public financial management and integrity and accountability in public life.

“These steps should help minimise the chances of a few corrupt people exploiting the assets of TCI for their own benefit, instead of these assets being available for the good of all the community. We will allow neither this framework to be rolled back nor the delivery of good and honest government to be undermined,” Hague said.

He also referred to an earlier open letter by Ewing that raised the issue of value added tax (VAT).

Hague reminded Ewing that the British government in 2010 was presented with a situation in which the TCI had an annual deficit of £30 million, which was set to grow significantly.

“This unsustainable situation led to the UK Department for International Development appointing a chief financial officer whose responsibilities were to ensure that this deficit was reduced and that TCI’s finances returned to surplus,” he said.

Eight milestones were then set, before which elections would not be permitted.

“Despite the financial milestone not yet having been met, the UK government agreed in good faith to permit elections in the expectation that an incoming government would administer the island’s finances so as to build an increasing surplus and release the
UK government from its government guarantee,” Hague said.

According to Hague, introducing VAT was central to this and seen to be in the interests of the TCI and the UK. That said, UK ministers have consistently made clear that a decision to introduce VAT is one for the TCI government, and that credible alternative measures would be considered

“The TCI government is responsible for delivering sustainable public finances. As you know this means that you and your government have to meet the public finance framework, which includes debt reduction targets and should enable you to refinance your debts without a UK guarantee after 2016. UK ministers have recently accepted your proposal not to introduce VAT on 1 April but instead to set public spending at a lower level commensurate with the absence of VAT, the uncertainty about alternative revenue streams, and the weakening outlook for some existing revenue streams. We are now awaiting your specific proposals on what additional expenditure cuts and alternative revenue measures you will put in place to ensure your adherence to the public finance framework,” he reminded Ewing.

Haig said that the UK government set out a clear vision in its Overseas Territories White Paper last year.

“We want the Overseas Territories, including the Turks and Caicos Islands, to flourish in partnership with the United Kingdom. We want you to build a strong and sustainable local economy and to develop as a community. Our relationship with you entails responsibilities for both parties. We have a broad responsibility to support the Territories and to ensure security and good governance. We expect the Territories to meet the same high standards of good governance and public financial management as in the UK,” he said.

According to Hague, Britain accepts a broad responsibility for joint security and continues to provide a range of support and training for public servants, such as police, prison and immigration services.

“We expect the elected government of TCI and other territories that wish to remain British to abide by the same high standards as the UK government in maintaining the rule of law, respect for human rights and integrity in public life, delivering efficient public services, upholding the judiciary and building strong and successful communities,” he said.

Hague also referred to the issue of independence that Ewing had raised and confirmed that this is an option for the TCI.

“If the people of TCI express a wish for independence through a clear and proper process, the UK government will meet its obligations to help the territory to achieve it,” he said.

Hague concluded by reiterating his belief both in democracy and that government must be honest and transparent and behave responsibly.

“The TCI government has the chance to shape the future of your islands. The UK government has invested much in helping put TCI back on the right path. TCI has a growing economy, modernised legislation and a committed public service. I hope you will use this inheritance wisely,” he said.

20130314-120031.jpg

20130314-120119.jpg

Categories
News

MEDIA STATEMENT FROM OPPOSITION LEADER HON. SHARLENE CARTWRIGHT-ROBINSON ON THE LEGAL CHALLENGES AGAINST PDM MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CHAMBERS

MEDIA STATEMENT FROM OPPOSITION LEADER HON. SHARLENE CARTWRIGHT-ROBINSON ON THE LEGAL CHALLENGES AGAINST PDM MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CHAMBERS

My Party remains vigilant in protecting and defending the rights of every Turks and Caicos Islander through strong representation in the House of Assembly and by completing the Objectives outlined in our Party’s Constitution and Campaign Manifesto (The Blue Print), chiefly among to form the Government of the Turks and Caicos Islands through a majority of members supporting our Party, the People’s Democratic Movement. Despite the recent legal challenge against four of our members by the Attorney General’s Chambers, we will continue to provide strong representation leading our people in the Right Direction.

On Friday March 8th, after a long day of waiting for the Attorney General’s Office to take legal action in the Amanda Misick’s Integrity Commission Notice matter, I instructed our Attorney’s Garland and Co. to file my Party’s case against Ms. Missick in the Supreme Court in Providenciales. We did so because the merits of our arguments are substantially different from those of the AG’s office.

At 4.00pm after our Attorneys had completed this process the PNP rushed to file a case against our candidate Oral Selver claiming that he made a false declaration. We will vigorously defend the veracity and completeness of our candidate Hon. Oral Selver in the Courts.
After more than 24 hours of rumors that the AG’s Chambers were going to be challenging sitting PDM Members and soon after this Event, our Attorneys became aware that the AG’s office was planning to file a separate matter not only against the PNP’s candidate for Cheshire Hall and Richmond Hill but also against four of sitting members namely: Hon. Edwin Astwood, Hon. Josephine Connolly, Hon. Derek Taylor and Hon. Delroy Williams.
Several attempts were made by our members to obtain the details of the allegations but the Acting Attorney General did not make it available or answer any further calls. Our members became officially aware of the nature of the case when the AG’s Office issued publicly a Press Release. Our members up until that time received no documents including a letter or Summons neither was our Party made aware. We view this move as unfortunate and unprofessional.

We view this entire act as completely misguided and untimely and will defend our Members’ right to remain sitting members of the House of Assembly. Contrary to public discourse, this matter has nothing to do with Conditional Purchase Lease, the Integrity Commission or the flipping of crown land. We will defend their good name, honor and integrity.

We wish to encourage our supporters and all Turks and Caicos Islanders to remain vigilant as the process is brought before the courts. My party respects the rule of law and we encourage our citizens to allow the matters that are now before the courts to be aired.

20130313-150245.jpg

20130313-150306.jpg

20130313-150345.jpg

20130313-150410.jpg

Categories
News

Statement by Premier Dr. Rufus Ewing about Attorney General’s Challenges in Turks and Caicos Islands

STATEMENT BY PREMIER HON. DR RUFUS EWING ON ATTORNEY GENERAL’S CHALLENGES TO SIX SEATS IN THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
The Attorney General of the Turks and Caicos Islands is duly authorized to and has issued proceedings in the Supreme Court of the Turks and Caicos Islands under section 53(2) of the Constitution, challenging the veracity of the declarations of five elected members of the House of Assembly, namely Hon. Derek Taylor, Hon. Josephine Connelly, Hon. George Lightbourne, Hon. Delroy Williams and Hon. Edwin Astwood for failing to declare their interests in freehold property with a subsisting Crown charge.
If these charges are proven, then according to the statement issued by the Acting Attorney General, these elected persons will be disqualified and By-elections will have to be held for each of the vacated seats.
The Acting Attorney General has similarly filed against Ms. Amanda Missick for failing on or before nomination day, to declare her interest in freehold property with a Crown charge, as required by section 49(1)(f) of the constitution.
Proceedings have also been issued against Mr. Oral Selver by a registered voter in the Cheshire Hall/Richmond Hill Constituency, for his failure on or before nomination day, to declare his interest in a Lease hold property, as required by section 49(1)(f) of the constitution.

If either of Ms. Amanda Missick or Mr. Oral Selver is found in violation of section 49(1)(f )of the Constitution, then that person would be disqualified from being nominated and the remaining candidate would run unopposed. If both Ms. Misick and Mr. Selver are found to be in violation then both would be disqualified, and a new By-election date would have to be set. If neither is disqualified, then the By-election would proceed as planned on March 22.
The case against Ms. Missick, along with that against Mr. Selver and all other members of the House of Assembly will be heard this week.
It is unfortunate that we have found ourselves at this point when our country, political parties and candidates can ill afford the exorbitant cost associated with elections, campaigning, and court hearings. We can call these teething pains of a new Constitution and electoral system or perhaps it is the manifestation of poorly drafted laws, which in many instances are in conflict with each other. There was also an obvious lack of oversight on the part of the Integrity Commission, Elections Office and Political Parties, which might have otherwise have prevented this situation from arising.
At this time, I am calling on the Attorney General Chambers, Integrity Commission, Elections Office, Political parties and Judiciary to work diligently and all together to expeditiously resolve these issues, and to once and for all put mechanisms in place to prevent them from happening in the future. It is past time for us as a country to move beyond politics and focus instead on the business of the restoration of democracy, political stability, economic recovery and nation building.

20130311-184432.jpg

Categories
News

The Electoral and Constitutional Fiasco in Turks and Caicos Islands

Published in TCI POST on 09th March 2013.

The Attorney General vs Ms. Amanda Missick
The Acting Attorney General of the Turks and Caicos Islands has filed in the supreme court against Ms. Amanda Missick stating the following:
“Following receipt of copies of the section 49(1)(f) Notices and related correspondence supplied to me by the TCI Integrity Commission and having caused background research to be undertaken in the Lands Division of the Chambers, I have come to the conclusion that I should act under section 50(3) of the Constitution, and today a challenge to the veracity of the declaration made by Ms. Amanda Missick, PNP candidate for the upcoming by-election in the Cheshire Hall and Richmond Hill Electoral District on 22 March 2013 has been filed before the Supreme Court.
FACT: It is a fact that Ms. Amanda Missick has a property 60804/138 with a TCIG belonger discount charge (see exhibit A)
According to the Integrity Commission and the Attorney General such a charge is considered to be a contract with Government and the Candidate shall to give NOTICE to the Integrity Commission on or before Nomination Day, in accordance with Section 49 (1)f of the TCI Constitution.
Disputable: It is disputable whether someone who has a Crown freehold property with a subsistent belonger discount charge (having had the property for less than 10 years after obtaining freehold title), is considered as having a contract with Government.
FACT: If a potential Candidate does not comply with Section 49 (1)f of the TCI Constitution 2011 he /she shall not be qualified to be an elected member of the House of Assembly. It states: 49.—(1) No person shall be qualified to be an elected member of the House of Assembly who, on the date of his or her nomination for election: (f) is a party to, or a partner in a firm or a director or manager of a company which is a party to, any contract with the Government and has not, by that date, disclosed in a notice to the Integrity Commission the nature of such contract and his or her interest, or the interest of such firm or company, in it;
FACT: The Constitution does not give a defined time period prior to Nomination Day during which such notice of contract with Government should be made. It simply states that such contracts should be “by that date (NOMINATION DAY), disclosed in a notice to the Integrity Commission the nature of such contract and his or her interest, or the interest of such firm or company, in it”
FACT: There is no prescribed form for giving such notice of contract with Government to the Integrity Commission. It simply says “disclosure in notice to the Integrity Commission”. This fact is also supported by the varied instruments of submission used by other elected members of the House of Assembly during the 2012 nomination process, who have made declarations under section 49 (1)f. Some used emailed submission, some used written hand delivered letters and some could have even called in.

Amanda-Lease Cancellation
THEREFORE:
FACT: Ms Amanda Missick made a Declaration to the Integrity Commission in on Oct 24, 2012 and this was publicized by the Integrity Commission in a Contracts Notice Register (see exhibit B). This declaration should have satisfied the condition under Section 49 (1)f of the Constitution, for nomination in the By-election, since such the notice is not time bound prior to nomination day and there is no legal requirement to make another declaration to the Integrity Commission unless there is additional information to be declare or remove, which is not the case with Ms. Missick.
Conclusion: Ms. Amanda Missick should not be disqualified. She did declare her interest to the Integrity Commission on time as she did so on October 24, 2012 and again on February 15, 2013, on a form used for members of the House of Assembly to declare their registrable Interest (including contracts with Government) which is a public document.
Also if the Judge rules that Crown freehold land with subsistent belonger discount charge is NOT contract with Government, then Ms. Missick would have had nothing to declare and should not be disqualified.
Furthermore:
If it is determined by the Courts that Crown Freehold title with subsistent belonger discount charge is a contract with Government, this should not affect Ms Missick as she made declaration of such contract on October 24, 2012 and again on February 15, 2013.
I rest my case and the learned Judge should see it likewise.
So I am encouraging all PNPs to Stay the Course!
Cheshire Hall Voter (Plaintiff) Vs Oral Selver

Oral Leasehold
A Cheshire Hall Voter filed in the Courts on March 8, 2013 against Isaac Oral Selver on the grounds that he failed to comply with the provisions of Section 49(1)f of the TCI Constitution.
It has been discovered that Mr. Oral Selver is the Leasee of Crown land 50206/1/1 – North Caicos (2.5 acres) which was issued on 12.11.2004 for a period of 3 years. Mr. Selver failed to pay his lease and in April 2011, he wrote to the PS of the Lands Department to have his lease extended. His letter was acknowledged in April 2011, and he was given conditions upon which the lease would be extended. The conditions included obtaining a building permit which he had, as stated in his reply letter and payment of arrears on the lease. Mr. Selver accepted the Offer and paid the arrears on the Property on December 24, 2012 (shortly after 2012 general elections).
Oral Lease Payment
The Plaintiff is of the view that Mr. Selver had a contract with Government on nomination day 2012 (October 25, 2012) and did not declare this interest at that time as required by Section 49(1)f of the constitution.
The Plaintiff is also of the view that Mr. Oral Selver still has a contract with Government i.e. the lease on property 50206/1/1 as he has accepted the conditional offer to extend the lease and is actively engaged with the Lands Department to retain the lease, which still remains in his name on the Lands register (see exhibit). Also of note is that the application procedure by the Lands Department for the termination of the lease has not been done. This procedure was use in the termination of a Conditional Purchase Lease (CPL) owned by Ms Amanda Missick, on property 60400/277 –Chalk Sound. Ms. Missick obtained the CPL around the same time as Mr Selver in 2004 and was denied extension without hesitation, that culminated in the cancellation of her lease on March 22, 2010.
Therefore:
We conclude that Mr Oral Selver failed to declare his contract with Government by nomination days October 25, 2012 and March 1, 2013 and should be disqualified under Section 49 (1)f.
The Attorney General
Vs
George Lightbourne
Hugh Derek Taylor
Josephine Connelly
Edwin Astwood
Vaden Delroy Williams
The Acting Attorney General is challenging the defendants listed, under section 53(2) of the constitution “An application to the Supreme Court for the determination of any question under subsection (1) may be made by the Attorney General or by any person who is a registered elector; and an application for the determination of any question under subsection (1)(b) may also be made by any member of the House of Assembly” It has been determined that the defendants have not filed all of their contracts (Crown freehold property with subsistent belonger discount charge) with Government and should be disqualified.
Contracts Notice Register – General Elections_001 Copy
The question for the Judge to rule on in this case is whether Crown freehold land with subsistent belonger discount charge is a contract with Government. If the Judge rule that it is then all of the elected members listed above will be disqualified and cease being members of the House of Assembly.
The next question to be determined by (Judge or AG?) is how should the vacated 5 seats in the House of Assembly be filled?
I am of the view that:
A constituency in the 2012 election, which had more than 2 candidates contesting but returning only 1 member to the House of Assembly (eg Wheeland), should go to a By-election if the elected member is disqualified.
A constituency in the 2012 election, which had only 2 candidates contesting and returning only 1 member to the House of Assembly (eg Grand Turk North or Grand Turk South), that the seat should be turned over to the other candidate upon disqualification of the elected candidate. If the non-elected Candidate is unavailable then the seat should go to a By-election.
A constituency in the 2012 election, which had more than 2 candidates contesting but returning more than 1 member to the House of Assembly (eg All-Islands Constituency), that the vacated seats due to disqualifications should be filled using the non-elected candidates based on the next highest number of votes and availability.
The British has indeed made a mockery of our democracy and the judicial system has fallen victim to the poorly drafted and ill-conceived laws enacted by the British, including of 2011 Constitution which is top of the list.
This is indeed a time for the PNP and PDM to come together and form a coalition Government and to fast track this country towards independence. I firmly believe that it is our people as opposed to our leaders and elected officials that are against unity and coalition in preference of the euphoria of partisan politics. It is however, our leaders who must make that bold decisions and lead the people in the direction of a united front in the best interest of the Turks and Caicos Islands.

20130309-124642.jpg

20130309-124544.jpg

Categories
News

Who is behind the New Political Chaos in Turks and Caicos Islands?

MEDIA STATEMENT BY ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL RHONDALEE BRAITHWAITE-KNOWLES ON CHALLENGES AGAINST MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT

“Separate and apart from the confidential declaration required to made to the Integrity Commission under the Integrity Commission Ordinance by a person in public life, the Constitution requires a candidate for election, on nomination day to make a declaration that he or she is qualified for election and that no disqualification mentioned in section 49(1) of the Constitution applies to him or her. In addition, section 49(1)(f) of the Constitution requires such a candidate to notify the Integrity Commission, prior to nomination day, of the existence of any contract between that candidate and the Government. Failure to so notify the Integrity Commission would result in a candidate being disqualified to stand in an election.

“Following receipt of copies of the section 49(1)(f) Notices and related correspondence supplied to me by the TCI Integrity Commission and having caused background research to be undertaken in the Lands Division of the Chambers, I have come to the conclusion that I should act under section 50(3) of the Constitution, and today a challenge to the veracity of the declaration made by Ms. Amanda Missick, PNP candidate for the upcoming by-election in the Cheshire Hall and Richmond Hill Electoral District on 22 March 2013 has been filed before the Supreme Court.

“On the basis of the background research undertaken I have also come to the conclusion that the election of certain sitting members of the House of Assembly should be challenged under section 53(2) of the Constitution. In that regard, challenges have also been filed today before the Supreme Court challenging the elections of Mr George Lightbourne elected member in the House of Assembly for the Grand Turk North Electoral District; Mr. Edwin Astwood elected member in the House of Assembly for the Grand Turk, South Electoral District; Mr. Derek Taylor member in the House of Assembly for the All Islands Electoral District; Mrs. Josephine Connolly elected member in the House of Assembly for the All Islands Electoral District and Delroy Williams elected member in the House of Assembly for the Wheeland Electoral District.

“The basis of each of these challenges is that when each of the individuals made their section 50(1) Nomination Day declaration to the Supervisor of Elections for the 9th November 2012 General Election and the upcoming 22nd March 2013 by-election, a disqualification mentioned in section 49(1)(f) applied to each them in that each of them has a contract with the Government which, by that date, they had not given notice of to the Integrity Commission, as required by section 49(1)(f) of the Constitution. The type of contract in each case is a charge to secure the payment to the Crown of a “Belonger Discount” (applicable under the Crown Land Policy) in the event of a sale in prescribed circumstances.

“I have asked the Court to determine whether in each case, the individual is or is not qualified to be an elected member of the House considering the failure to give notice of the respective charges.

“The Constitution provides for a process for challenge in each of these cases in the public interest. If the Court determines that each member is disqualified then,

a) In the case of Ms. Missick, she will not be able to stand for election on 22nd March and the sole remaining candidate will be declared elected;

b) In the case of the members of the House of Assembly, their seats will be vacated and a by-election will have to be called. A decision on their disqualification would not prevent them from standing in a subsequent by-election called as a result.

20130309-112009.jpg

20130309-112030.jpg

20130309-112050.jpg

Categories
News

ATTORNEY GENERAL IN TURKS AND CAICOS EXPLAINS THE ERROR

Published in TCI Weekly Now on 22nd February 2013

Attorney General Huw Shepheard on Wednesday issued another follow up press release in an attempt to explain why he reacted to a news report on the government radio station. Based on information supplied by family members of former premier Michael Misick, the early RTC news broadcast had announced that Misick had been granted bail and released from a Brazilian prison.

Misick had been arrested in Rio de Janeiro on an international warrant on December 7 last year and had been held in custody pending an application for extradition by Britain on behalf of the TCI.

Shepheard issued his own press release that same morning denying that Misick had been released. Later the same day, Sheapheard issued a second release saying that a Brazilian court had in fact released Misick on bail while extradition procedures were worked through,

In his latest statement, the attorney general says he was incorrectly informed by Brazilian authorities when he issued his first denial of the bail report. Shepheard has again repeated his earlier remarks stating that his office had sent the required extradition documents within the required time frame and Misick’s extradition is pending.

“My initial statement on the release of Michael Misick from custody in Brazil, was truthful to the best of my belief and was based on credible information that had been received from the authorities in Brazil. It turned out that they were mistaken and therefore that I had been misinformed and accordingly I corrected my statement,” Shepheard said.

“I take this opportunity to repeat that the extradition request has been made properly and in accordance with normal law and procedure. The TCIG has met its obligations under the Extradition Treaty to serve the papers on the proper authorities in Brazil within the set time limit. Due process must now be followed, that complies with the Treaty and with Brazilian law,” he added.

Reportedly, Misick had been granted bail because the papers from Shepheard arrived late in Brazil.

Meanwhile, Radio Turks and Caicos is claiming they are a fair and balanced media site. However, the government sponsored station has in the past come in for criticism for employing two well known members of the Progressive National Party (PNP) — current speaker of the house Robert Hall and PNP-appointed House Member Ruth Blackman — to host the Expressions radio show

20130222-120515.jpg

Categories
News

Press Statement from Advocates Legal Group in Turks and Caicos Islands

Published in TCI Post on 01st of February

Advocates Legal Group – Press Statement Re: Intimidation and Threats by the Attorney General Chambers

ADVOCATES LEGAL GROUP
MEMBERS: Mark A Fulford, Noel T Skippings, Arthur Hamilton, Ashwood Forbes, Courtenay Barnett
PRESS RELEASE
RE: INTIMIDATION & THREATS TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH
MADE BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CHAMBERS
As Lawyers, we feel compelled to respond to the Attorney General`s public statement, as we find it to be very high handed, vexatious and wreaks of intimidation of the highest order.
Our country`s constitution guarantee us the freedom of expression, and unless the AG Chambers changes that law too, Part 1, Section 1 of the Constitution still applied to the Turks and Caicos Islands.
It is not acceptable that the Attorney General should cause to be published a threat of 10 years imprisonment when the press published and freely expresses factually based concerns about the manifest flaws and shortcomings in the justice system under the present dispensation.
It is indeed a compromise of the Constitutional enshrinement and protection of the fundamental right of “freedom of expression”. The AG’s threat to imprison by invoking the antiquated concept of contempt by way of “scandalising the court” fails to recognize the following:-
A. Contempt by way of scandalising the court was used years ago in England as a means of silencing legitimate criticism of Judges and others in authority. It is no longer used in England, and since parity by way of “gay rights” has been strenuously advanced by HMG in the TCI, the lawyers group is duty bound to insist that obsolete laws not be used in this manner to silence those who make legitimate criticism of a manifestly flawed justice system.
B. If the individual or individuals named in any article feel that they have been defamed, then sue the published on the article for defamation and do not threaten either lawyers or the press which should not be so intimidated because a Registrar, or Chief Justice or any Judge feels aggrieved for having read what was published in the press.
B. The high office of Attorney General should be, with respect, more concerned about:
Compromises in the system of justice,
Selective prosecution,
the impasse between Governor and Government over VAT,
The use of prosecutorial powers to pressure confessions and settlements,
Rather than be it implied or expressed be seem as silencing legitimate criticisms of a flawed justice system.
END
31 January 2013

Posted by john Glasgow on Feb 1 2013.

20130201-151654.jpg

https://www.windycityhabitat.org/