Opposition leader, Kamla Persad-Bissessar wants Chief Justice Ivor Archie to come clean and indicate whether Madam Justice Reid Ballantyne is the judicial officer who returned the file that was supposedly missing in the malicious prosecution case for the Vindra Naipaul-Coolman murder accused.
In a statement on Thursday, she said, the plot hatched and publicized by the Attorney General to cover up his own incompetence and mismanagement of his Ministry has been totally discredited.
Persad-Bissessar said, “No rational or sensible person, with an ounce of common sense, believes his nancy story that the file went missing, and that is why he was unable to defend this massive 20 million dollar claim for malicious prosecution.
“To compound Armour’s folly, the file has mysteriously been found and returned to the Solicitor General in the wake of the UNC’s demand for Madam Justice Reid Ballantyne, who acted as counsel for the Attorney General in the case, to break her silence on the malicious and serious allegation that she conducted an entire trial without the relevant file.”
The Express Newspaper stated that the file was suddenly delivered by an unnamed and unidentified high-ranking judicial officer and Persad-Bissessar said as the mystery deepens, it is incumbent upon the Chief Justice to come clean.
She said this is not a matter that can simply be swept under the carpet – after all, the allegation that the trial was conducted by then Assistant Solicitor General Karen Reid Ballantyne, without a file, is being made by the Attorney General, who represents the State and is the titular head of the Bar.
The Siparia MP said a number of issues have now arised and she is asking:
1. Who is the high-ranking judicial officer that returned the file that was allegedly missing?
2. Why was there no immediate correction and clarification to explain that the file was not missing and that there was no truth to Armour’s baseless and ridiculous plot?
3. If the file has been returned by the counsel who represented the Attorney General in the trial, what is the point of having two retired judges investigate Armour’s theory of the missing file? Why can’t the Permanent Secretary, who is appointed by the independent Public Service Commission conduct the inquiry?
4. How much is this investigation going to cost the taxpayers, given the 20-million-dollar price tag for Armour’s incompetence?
She said the constitutional principle of separation of powers demands that the Judiciary remains independent of the Government and the Parliament.
“It is unfortunate that the Chief Justice did not take heed to the warning contained in our recent letter. We indicated that there is a need for the Judiciary to issue an independent statement to clear the air on the allegation of a sitting judge, that she conducted a trial in breach of the Code of Ethics without having a file.
We warned the Chief Justice that the Judiciary should not be seen to align itself with the political shenanigans of the Government by associating itself with this politically driven investigation which is designed to do political damage control and save face for the Armour and the Government.”
“Justice Stanley John’s acknowledgement of the return of the “missing” file via press release on the Attorney General’s letterhead highlights the fact that Armour has selected his own investigators to investigate his own misconduct – himself unto himself! This investigation is a ridiculous farce and the Judiciary should avoid giving it any credibility because of the obvious adverse impact on the integrity and reputation of the administration of justice.
COMMENTS