Embattled Chief Justice Satnarine Sharma was yesterday stripped of his top judicial post because of his decision not to sit in Court.
By Darren BahawPresident George Maxwell Richards, acting in accordance with Section 103 of the Constitution, appointed Justice of Appeal Roger Hamel-Smith to act as Chief Justice, until the final determination of all legal proceedings relevant to a complaint made by Chief Magistrate Sherman McNicolls against Sharma.
In an exclusive lead story in Thursday's Daily Express, it was reported that the President intended to suspend Sharma from office because of his determination not to perform his judicial functions.
This newspaper also reported that the President was going to act in accordance with Section 103 of the Constitution, which provides for an acting appointment to the Office of Chief Justice to be made "where the Chief Justice is, for any reason, unable to perform the functions of his office".
News of the President's decision reached the media even before Sharma learned of it, the Daily Express was told by a reliable source close to the CJ's camp, and a team of lawyers are already reviewing the latest action to determine whether the President's decision was lawful.
Emphasis is being placed on the definition of the word "unable" in the section and word from Sharma's camp suggest that Sharma has never indicated that he was unable to perform his functions, since he was neither sick nor going to be out of the country.
The President's decision is being seen as "highly irregular" and may be open to challenge in court, some sources argued.
Sharma has deliberately not presided in any criminal or civil appeal since the controversy became public over the new allegations in early May. In a media release issued on July 26, Sharma stated that he would not "execute any judicial functions as Chief Justice" to preserve the public's confidence in the administration of justice. He noted, however, that he would limit his functions "to those that are strictly administrative in nature".
The Office of the President issued a media release referring to Richards's televised nationwide address, on July 25, in which he stated that it was necessary for him to take immediate action to resolve the crisis facing the nation relating to the "present state of affairs involving the Honourable Chief Justice". Richards said then that he was awaiting legal advice before announcing his decision to the nation.
In the release issued yesterday, it stated that the President received a letter from Sharma on July 26, which stated inter alia:
"I wish to assure Your Excellency that I do not intend to preside over, or sit in any courts pending the determination of all legal proceedings relevant to such allegations".
The allegations referred to by the Chief Justice, the release stated, concern the allegations raised by the Chief Magistrate in his complaint to Prime Minister Patrick Manning that attempts were made to influence him in during the trial of former prime minister Basdeo Panday.
"As a consequence, in accordance with Section 103 of the Constitution, the President has today appointed Mr Justice Roger Hamel-Smith, Justice of Appeal, to act as Chief Justice until the determination of all legal proceedings relevant to the complaint of the Chief Magistrate against the Honourable Chief Justice have been determined," the release added.
Another release from the Ministry of Public Administration and Information, apparently erroneously dated July 25, stated that Hamel-Smith's appointment to act as Chief Justice took immediate effect from yesterday and "was made in accordance with Section 103 of the Constitution, after consultation with the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition".
Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar told the Daily Express that at 4.15 p.m. yesterday, her office received official correspondence from the Office of the President on the issue, enquiring whether she had any objections to the appointment of Justice Hamel-Smith to perform the functions in the office of Chief Justice.
She said the letter made reference to the provisions of Section 103 of the Constitution and that she had earlier spoken to the President on the telephone on the issue.
"I express my concern about meaningful consultation, given the history of such consultation. In the events that transpired, I am of the view that the there was no meaningful consultation, instead a mere formality ex post facto the decision," she said.
Persad-Bissessar said she raised her concern about whether it was proper to have a telephone conversation to deal with such an important matter and questioned the haste with which the President wanted to act.
She said she was of the view that Section 103 of the Constitution was not properly triggered given the circumstances, since there was no vacancy in the Office of the Chief Justice and there was no inability on the part of Sharma to perform his functions.
"There has been an allocation of responsibility within his portfolio. There is clearly no inability on the part of the Chief Justice to perform his functions. Consequently the powers given to the President under Section 103 of the Constitution are not triggered," she said.
"The President has been entrapped by the manipulations of the Government to do their bidding and to once again subvert Section 137 of the Constitution by removing the Chief Justice from office."
Persad-Bissessar said Section 137 provides the machinery to deal with allegations of misbehaviour against the Chief Justice.
Such actions, she said, was "especially dangerous where matters (challenging the institution of criminal proceedings) are presently being heard by the Courts of the land".
"I have serious concern about the person to replace the Chief Justice. The allegation is that person advised the Government on the manner on which they could proceed against the Chief Justice in relation to the first impeachment proceedings (relating to allegations of trying to influence Attorney General John Jeremie and Director of Public Prosecutions Geoffrey Henderson to drop a criminal charge against Prof Vijay Naraynsingh).
"This latest action further compounds the situation and continues to make Trinidad and Tobago the laughing stock of the democratic world," Persad-Bissessar concluded.
