About a week ago, one of my favourite persons on the American political landscape, Massachusetts’ senior senator, Elizabeth Warren, in a speech given at the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate, related an encounter she had with Rep. John Lewis, whom she asked about a 1961 incident, in which a civil rights group (inclusive of Dr. M. L King) had gathered in the basement of a church, huddled together, as they waited for promised help from the US military, to save them from the mob that had gathered outside, threatening to burn the church with them in it.
Mr. Lewis related that his parents did not want him to become involved in the civil rights movement; they did not want him to “…cause any trouble…”, but he did it anyway. When asked why, he was quoted by Senator Warren as saying: “Sometimes, it is important to cause necessary trouble.” Needless to say, the “…necessary trouble…” that the Congressman referred to, were what led to some landmark changes; changes in the lot of the black man in America, to the point where, today, a black man is the president of the country.
Before getting into the meat of what I wish to say, I will make another analogy, it being that, as a youngster, I was rather competitive at the game of draughts (Americans call it checkers). However, one of the things about the game is that, as a spectator, you have the tendency to see many more moves than you usually see when you are on the board. The point is, when you are involved in something, your proximity to it can cause you not to be able to see some critical things you may need to see.
My writings of the past have shown that I was opposed to the way in which things were being done under the previous administration. Decisions that I did not think were right, were being made and, being the reactionary that I am, I criticized.
Now, this new government has come to the table and, in my estimation, seems to have begun to make decisions that I am having some difficulty understanding. Here are some examples:
• In the case of the former DPP, I was rather pleased to hear AG Byron articulate his position. He said that, according to the law governing the age to which the DPP could work, the DPP ought to retire by age 55, but if, before the age of 55, he makes an arrangement with the Governor General, he/she could work to the age of 60. In this case, former DPP Sinanan was already 55 years of age when he was appointed by the former administration, so the option of working until he attained 60, had expired even before he was appointed. In addition, he was appointed in July of 2013, for a period of two (2) years, which ended in July of 2015.
The matter was brought to court but, rather than being heard, it was settled and the parties agreed upon a confidentiality arrangement which requires that neither side would say what the terms were. So, in essence, a public servant, to wit, the Attorney General, entered into a confidentiality agreement, meaning that the public for whom he works, can never know how much of its money, if any, was bargained away.
If this causes him some trouble, it is necessary trouble.
• With the departure of Mr. Sinanan, there was a void in the office of the DPP so, just recently, I read in the local media of the appointment of one Arudranauth Gossai, in an acting capacity, to that post. The name immediately rang a bell so, I went back in time and found that this was the same person who, in 2011, had advised the then Supervisor of Elections, Pastor Leroy Benjamin, to ignore the instructions of the Electoral Commission, the body whose prime function is to supervise the Supervisor of Elections.
Just to remind you, there was the situation in Nevis in which a number of persons, properly registered, had been removed from the voters’ list without the necessary due process, and the Electoral Commission had instructed that they be restored. Pastor Benjamin, intending not to restore the names, resorted to the government’s legal machinery where Mr. Gossai was a Crown Counsel. Mr. Gossai’s advice, as I said, was that the Supervisor was not subject to the instructions of the Electoral Commission.
That advice always rang strangely with me because, according to my reading of the Constitution, it was wrong, particularly in light of Section 33:4, which says: “The function of the Commission shall be to supervise the Supervisor of Elections in the performance of his functions under Section 34(1), 38(9) and 113(5).” For clarity, Section 34(1) says: “The Supervisor of Elections shall exercise general supervision over the registration of voters in elections of members of the Assembly and over the conduct of such elections.”, while Section 38(9) refers to referenda, and 113 speaks to any referendum with regard to the cessation of Nevis, all of which are electoral processes that are subject to the supervision of the Supervisor of Elections.
Mr. Gossai, in responding to criticism of his advice, and in speaking to WINN-FM, on or about June 20th, 2011, defended his advice as being independent of anyone’s influence. He had found himself under pressure, given that his boss at the time, Attorney General Patrice Nisbett, was a candidate in the same election in Nevis. (http://www.sknvibes.com/news/newsdetails.cfm/30639)
My attitude is, if Mr. Gossai’s advice was independent, he was clearly wrong, given the wording of the constitution. On the other hand, if he gave it under duress, it shows that he is malleable, neither of which would look good on anyone’s Curriculum Vitae.
If this brings AG Byron any trouble, it is necessary trouble.
• My final issue is that, recently, the police made a serious find when, as the news said, intelligence led them to a secluded beach in the Conaree area, where a boat from somewhere, manned by two persons, was being met by two persons, in a pick-up truck, on shore. It was reported that one of the occupants of the vessel, upon being confronted by the police, opened fire and, when the police returned fire, one of the occupants was killed. Further, the word started to make the rounds that one of the two persons on shore, was the son of a “…prominent…” Kittitian, but to date, there has been no official word as to who the persons were, who were taken into custody.
In fact, there has been no indication as to where the boat supposedly originated from, nor has anyone’s name been published. And, like everyone else, I have been apprised of someone’s name, but I will not risk the money I do not have by venturing to mention it. As such, it is left to the government to apply the law equally and do what it has always done, when it comes to the so-called little men on the street. Names and photographs are usually published and there can be no reason why, because of who this individual may be, his name cannot be published like everyone else’s.
Again, if this brings any trouble to the doorstep of the AG, it is necessary trouble, and I make no apology for it.
The point of all this is, there was a change of government on February 16th, 2015. The new government was swept in, riding the wave of the people’s need for a shift in the way in which things were done. If what has been cataloged herein is any indication of a developing trend, I shudder to think of what will happen in the ensuing 4½ years of this term in office.
Whether or not money was involved in the confidential agreement with the former DPP, the fact that this is a public affair should mean that a confidential arrangement in which the public is virtually oblivious to its details, should not be. Initially, being no legal scholar, I wondered if it may have been court-ordered. However, it is now clear that the court did not order it so it would be interesting to hear Attorney General Byron’s explanation.
Appointing someone with Mr. Gossai’s record is stuck like a bone in my throat because, while he endeavoured to justify and explain away the advice he rendered to Leroy Benjamin, it was not to anyone’s satisfaction. And, for some reason, he seems to have gotten lost with all of the focus having gone to what was going on in Nevis, and its aftermath. It was on the strength of Gossai’s‘legal’ advice that Benjie pressed on with what resulted in him and Bernadette Hanley being roundly condemned by two courts. The courts found that they were guilty of “…misfeasance in public office…”, and ordered them to pay hefty court costs, which many believe may have been paid by the government of the day, possibly from SIDF. I just hope that, by making this appointment, AG Byron will not have “…cut a whip to buss his own tail…”, as we say it colloquially.
My attitude to the police is pretty much known. Generally, when someone is arrested, the police force knows what to do in order to bring that person to justice. One of the things I have been told, is that, when someone is arrested, he/she ought to be charged within 72 hours, or he walks free. If I am to go on the lack of information coming from the police, to date, the individuals who were arrested on Conaree have not yet been charged and, given that 72 hours (three days) have passed since their arrest, they may walk free. That cannot be good, given that tons of small fish get caught up in the net, having been found with a spliff here and a spliff there; a rock here and a rock there, while the importers of ganja with a reported street value of close to $1 million, are yet to be charged and have their names and photographs decorate the pages of the media.
Again, if this brings any trouble to the doorstep of the AG, it is necessary trouble, and I trust that it will bring about changes in how the business of government is conducted.
Disclaimer
This article was posted in its entirety as received by SKNVibes.com. This media house does not correct any spelling or grammatical error within press releases and commentaries. The views expressed therein are not necessarily those of SKNVibes.com, its sponsors or advertisers.
