Appeal Court reserves judgment

By ONIKA JAMES Friday, July 17 2009

http://www.newsday.co.tt/crime_and_court/0,103919.html 

An Appeal court panel has reserved its judgment in the matter of the Trinidad and Tobago Civil Rights Association and the Cabinet.

Having heard submissions from the association’s attorney, Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, SC, and Reginald Armour SC, who is representing the Cabinet, the panel, which comprised of Chief Justice Ivor Archie, and Appeal Judges Peter Jamadar, and Nolan Bereaux, announced that they will rule on the matter by, or before the month of October. The matter stemmed from a 2007, judgment in which High Court Judge, Justice Lennox Deyalsingh declared that, the promise made by the Patrick Manning Government to give sugar workers leases for agricultural lands was enforceable in law. Deyalsingh ordered the Cabinet to grant the leases. The Government appealed the matter on the grounds that Deyalsingh had an apparent bias in the matter, in that prior to being a temporary judge in 2006, he wrote several articles in the newspapers, in which he criticised the Government.

In March 2007, an Appeal Court panel blanked a judicial review which sought to force Justice Deyalsingh to deal with an application to disqualify himself from the Caroni workers judicial review case which was filed in the Court of Appeal.

However, Senior Counsel Maharaj, responded yesterday and said, before Deyalsingh became a judge, he was entitled to criticise the Government and the law, and that the history of the judge or, his political association cannot be a ground of bias. Maharaj, further said, if that was so then, many judges in the Caribbean would not be able to function.

Deyalsingh was fearless

Caroni Lands Appeal

Deyalsingh was fearless—Ramesh

Francis Joseph

Published: 17 Jul 2009

Francis Joseph

Senior Counsel Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj submitted yesterday that retired High Court judge, Lennox Deyalsingh, was independent and fearless. Addressing the Court of Appeal in the appeal brought by Prime Minister Patrick Manning and his Cabinet, Maharaj said nothing which was said or written by Deyalsingh could constitute apparent bias.

On Wednesday, Manning's attorney, Reginald Armour, SC, asked the Court of Appeal to quash the decision made by Deyalsingh and send it back for retrial before another judge. He claimed that there was the possibility of apparent bias in four articles and a letter written to the media by the former judge. The Court of Appeal, comprising Chief Justice Ivor Archie, Justice Peter Jamadar and Justice Nolan Bereaux, reserved judgment to October. On December 7, 2007, Deyalsingh, presiding in the Port-of-Spain High Court, ordered the Government to grant leases to ex-Caroni (1975) Ltd workers for lands which were promised to them more than six years ago.

The judge set a deadline of June 30, 2008, for the two-acre agricultural plots to be leased to 7,900 displaced workers and ordered that "proper infrastructure, including access, drainage and irrigation facilities," be attached to each plot. Maharaj said there was no merit in the application brought by the Prime Minister. He said four of the articles were written by the judge when he was in retirement. He said those articles were critical of the Government during the period of time that the articles were written. "The contents of the articles, however, clearly showed that the criticisms made by the judge were not directed or related to any of the issues or matters which he had to determine in the Caroni case," Maharaj said. "It must be shown that the criticisms in question were made in respect of issues which the judge determined or which he had to determine."

He said judges were expected and trained to be able to judge on the facts and the law relevant to issues before them and to be aware of the possible influence of their personal views. "In Trinidad and Tobago, former politicians have been appointed to the bench…They were expected to set aside their political affiliations on appointment and were confidently expected to rule without partiality in cases involving the State," Maharaj said. In the present case, he said, Deyalsingh was reappointed to the Bench after the four articles were written. He said this was a clear inference that his articles were not a concern to the Judicial and Legal Service Commission. As to the letter which was published on July 17, 2006, Maharaj said this was written during extraordinary times. He said this was the time when an attempt was made to arrest then Chief Justice Sat Sharma.

"A fair-minded observer would have welcomed this fearless comment from a judge," Maharaj said. "There was no link between the contents of that letter and the Caroni matter before the court. "If the judge had criticised the Government for their brazen breaches in the Caroni matter, and then come and sit on the case, allegations could have been made."

http://guardian.co.tt/news/general/2009/07/17/deyalsingh-was-fearless-ramesh