By Onika James Thursday, October 15 2009

The Law Association yesterday responded to Attorney General John Jeremie’s (AG) criticisms of Justice Rajendra Narine in Parliament: his reliance on the opinions of B. St. Michael Hylton QC, and Dr Lloyd Barnett: and the AG’s Parliamentary statement that Martin Daly, SC “spoke a lie”.

In a five-page letter, President of the Law Association, Martin Daly, SC, told the AG, “the Council made a statement indicating that it was wrong to say that the affidavit of Mr Abu Bakr did not exist legally. It is extraordinary that you would rely on the opinions of Hylton QC and Barnett to suggest that the Council’s statement should be corrected, when their opinions confirm the correctness of the Council’s position.

“If something does not exist legally how can it be used in other proceedings and for other purposes? It is precisely because it exists legally that, in the words of your Counsel, it is clear and beyond dispute that it can be used in other proceedings, and for the other purposes.”

Daly noted that since “the affidavit continued to exist legally Justice Narine had jurisdiction to direct the Registrar of the Supreme Court to forward a copy of the affidavit to the Acting Commissioner of Police, and the Acting Director of Public Prosecutions for their consideration.” Daly added, “ having carefully considered the two opinions on this issue on which you rely, the Council finds them unconvincing.

“We are also disturbed by the serious error made in Barnett’s second opinion dated October 5, 2009. He has criticised the Law Society (sic) for exaggerating the nature of your statement but in doing so , Barnett is in error in stating that the Council described your remarks as “derogatory.” That reference was made to another critic of the learned Judge, and not to you.”

Daly also chided the AG for his descent into a “personal attack” on the Law Association’s President.

“Whatever the disagreement between the Council and yourself on the relevant case law, the Council considers it disgraceful that you descended into a personal attack on me, presumably using the cover of Parliamentary privilege. It is significant that you have never identified the “lie” which you alleged that I spoke as President of the Law Association. I spoke no lie.

“I put forward the Council’s view relating to the matter bearing in mind that a sitting judge would not be expected to enter the arena to answer the criticism of him. Moreover, in making the attack on me, you ignored the obvious fact that the statement was one of the Council, comprising as it does a body of lawyers democratically elected to represent their colleagues,” Daly said.

The Senior Counsel also said, “in view of the fact that you accused someone in the Senate of a “lie” which you never identified, the Council has decided that this letter be copied to the President of the Senate with a request that he advise whether the practices and procedures of Parliament permit such conduct.

“ The decision of Justice Narine to refer to the copy of the affidavit for investigation is an order from which an appeal lies. The Council therefore stands by its statement, and does not accept that the opinions which you have provided require us to make any correction of the Council’s press release. We look forward to a return to disagreement with civility, when such disagreement is necessary,” added the statement from the legal body.