AG: DALY TOLD A LIEBy Clint Chan Tack Thursday, September 24 2009
The duel between the legal and judicial fraternity and the Government escalated yesterday as Attorney General (AG) John Jeremie called out president of the Law Association Martin Daly SC for “a lie” and defended Prime Minister Patrick Manning’s right to veto.
Jeremie also hit back at Daly and the Law Association for attacking his criticism of Justice Rajendra Narine for ruling on an affidavit which the Court of Appeal and Privy Council previously said was “scandalous and irrelevant” and should be removed from the record.
In the affidavit, Jamaat al Muslimeen leader Abu Bakr claimed he had an agreement with Manning in relation to a $32 million debt the Jamaat owed the State and the 2002 general election.
Jeremie struck a decisive blow against Daly in the Budget debate in the Senate.
“I am the Attorney General. I am used to attack but when the president of our Law Association speaks a lie I am obliged to call him out,” Jeremie declared.
In response to Daly’s position that Manning’s veto of Carla Brown-Antoine for the post of Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) was “unfathomable”, Jeremie began by stressing the importance of the DPP’s Office.
“So important are these officers in the executive function of the State and the Attorney General, that they are constitutionally protected,” Jeremie said.
Section III of the Constitution outlines Manning’s role as head of the Executive in determining the suitability of persons who will hold top posts such as the DPP. Observing that the Prime Minister’s veto power regarding such posts can be found in other constitutions premised on the separation of powers, Jeremie said: “I was not there when the Prime Minister exercised his veto earlier this year in respect of the appointment of a DPP. But that he has the power to do so cannot be doubted as it is expressly provided for in the Constitution.”
Before anyone followed Daly’s lead and criticise Manning for exercising his veto, Jeremie advised: “We should all be cognisant of the fact that there should be a presumption that the Prime Minister will not act capriciously in making appointments to executive positions, in particular, to key executive positions.”
To support this argument, Jeremie revealed that in his previous tenure as AG, he encountered a chief legal officer who hid an opinion done by a queen’s counsel which the officer had retained.
Jeremie said he had no idea on whose authority this was done but the opinion advised on the laying of a criminal charge in respect of prominent persons. He explained that if the Prime Minister has concerns about such a person, “it is his duty to exercise a veto, however unpopular that might be.” The AG added these were not appointments to the judicial arm of the State “over which the Executive has properly no control.”
“We are speaking of appointments within the executive branch of the State. I condemn the irresponsible and convenient statements by the president of the Law Association last week who made remarks...in opposition to the exercise of this basic right of the Prime Minister as it is established by the Constitution,” he said.
Jeremie said Daly’s claim the PM’s veto of Brown-Antoine could have been successfully challenged, flies in the face of the express terms set out in the Constitution and before the Privy Council which has “had a say in this matter on two cases now pending before it.”
Declaring that courage was needed in all executive positions, Jeremie slammed Daly for attacking a retired Justice of Appeal (Jean Permanand) who supported the view that Justice Narine could not use the affidavit “in defiance of an order of a superior court.”
Revealing he sought the advice of two distinguished Caribbean experts on this matter, Jeremie said he received the preliminary opinion of one of them, Jamaican senior attorney, Dr Lloyd Barnett.
Stating that Barnett’s opinion indicates “it was right for Justice Narine to be cricitised for his actions,” Jeremie promised to make the opinions of Barnett and the second expert available to the Parliament. The AG also said he will write to the Law Association “in the hope that they will cease to be an automatic opposition to the Executive.”
Repeated efforts to contact Daly for comment were unsuccessful. Jeremie’s rebuttal was in response to Daly’s stinging condemnation of Manning’s veto of Brown-Antoine, a former acting DPP, in a ceremony to welcome her as a High Court judge last Friday. Daly had said there were clouds over the Judiciary. The following day, the Law Association issued a statement against Jeremie’s criticism of Narine in Parliament last week. That same day, the ruling PNM described the Law Association as “a bunch of political opportunists and political masqueraders”.
These exchanges occurred in the crossfire of Chief Justice Ivor Archie’s opposition to a proposed Ministry of Justice at the opening of the law term a week ago. Government subsequently extended an invitation to Archie for talks on this matter.
