Letter to the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago

Letter to the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago,

Dr Keith Rowley

 

Dear Sir,

 

I am wondering where is my land of ‘milk and honey’ that I was promised by your PNM predecessor, the late Mr Patrick Manning. You have not delivered on Mr Manning’s promises to this nation. There is no tangible strategy for delivering to the people, ‘the land of milk and honey’. Instead, the country is in a perfect mess and well on a highway to hell! In effect the PNM has hoodwinked this nation.

 

I write to you with fervent hope that you use the powers of your respected Office to assist my beloved country rise above on at least one major crisis it is caught in presently. In this part of my letter, I refer to the sad, sorry spectacle of the Chief Justice hanging on to his Office by the proverbial fingernails tips.

 

May I point out some obvious facts to you? The Chief Justice holds not one, but two other important Offices because of his exalted position as Chief Justice -- the titular head of the Bar, and the Chairman of the Judicial and Legal Services Commission. Therefore, I am forced - my words choking past the disbelief strangling them in my throat - to ask, “Which one of these Offices was responsible for the ‘promotion’ and, more importantly, the ‘termination’ of Marcia Ayers-Caesar as a judge?”

 

Upon a clear answer to the above question, can you please then tell us which Office will be using taxpayers’ dollars to defend this monumental cockup in the Courts since Mrs Ayers-Caesar has already begun legal proceedings?

 

You see, my Prime Minister, there has been several notable ‘indiscretions’ the Chief Justice has been associated with while holding in Office - all of which, by the way, have been aired in the public domain, making Trinidad and Tobago a laughing stock at least among Commonwealth Nations that have inherited the British Westminster-style model of governance. Any one of these ‘indiscretions’ might constitute a prima facie case of serious misbehaviour in public office. Sadly, I am to understand that in your capacity as Prime Minister, you have refused to see what lies before your very eyes.

 

Any discretion you may have within your powers under Section 137 of the T&T Constitution, lies solely in your hands. But such discretion is not absolute and is not subject to your sole whims and fancies. You see, in Sharma v. Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions & Ors (Trinidad and Tobago) [2006] UKPC 57, brought to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) by your former party leader Patrick Manning, at paragraph 27 Lord Bingham clearly says:

 

“the court was, however, right to say that if the Prime Minister received a potentially credible report of serious misconduct by the Chief Justice he had a duty to act and could not simply ignore it”

 

Clearly, considering what ‘appears’ to be serious misconduct arising out of the behaviour of the Chief Justice, you have a duty to permit the President to appoint an independent tribunal regarding an investigation. A duty, sir, that you cannot ignore - in the words of the esteemed Judge. You are required by law not to fetter in any discretion or powers you exercise. Your failure to act decisively and diligently could open you to Judicial Review. You are perhaps aware that one of the grounds for judicial review is abuse of the discretion that you must refer the matter to the President. Abuse of that discretion could come by several means, unreasonableness being merely one. Perhaps you’ve heard of ‘Wednesbury unreasonableness’? It is when a decision is made that is so absurd that no reasonable person could possibly come to that decision. In Trini parlance, dotishness, nuh.

 

There are many other ills facing T&T, the ‘land of milk and honey’ according to your ex-boss. High crime rates, where people - living in self-protective steel cages - cannot even open a gate to drive a car into their own properties without bandits attacking. Young girls going missing; whether murdered or trafficked, we do not know. The police don’t know either for that matter. Even pension-age women aren’t safe, as sick rapes and murders are common to that age group also.

 

The foreign exchange situation is a merry muddle. The ferry fiasco is adrift in the open sea. Traffic into the centralised capital is a nightmare in daytime. The security services are insecure. There is a real perception that the Integrity Commission has lost sight of ‘integrity’. I can go on and on, but the important point is that all is not well. It is a country convulsing on the edge of a precipice, and any day may see the final convulsion that pushes it into the abyss.

 

Even if you act today Sir, the results may not be seen for another 20 years, in realistic terms. That does not mean you give up. You and your party can act now. Leave a commendable legacy and make the future brighter for the future generations. But failure to act leaves another type of legacy, as left behind by the last three of your predecessors. That type of legacy only fuel ‘rum-shop talk’ and it ill befits a Statesman. Let your name and party live on for the right reasons. Show the sturdiness of character you wish to be remembered for.

 

I hope that you take this advice in the spirit it is offered - as patriotic steerage to bring Gypsy’s ‘sinking ship’ back to safe shores.

Screwing (with) the dead

This morning, I was rather taken aback when I saw this article:

DOCTORS REFUSE TO TESTIFY

A $2 million lawsuit, filed by a man whose wife died following a C-section delivery at the San Fernando General Hospital almost five years ago, is in danger of collapsing because the woman’s husband is unable to find a specialist doctor who is willing to provide expert medical evidence for the Judge to determine whether three doctors were negligent.

Unable to secure the testimony of one, Lorne Ramsoomair filed an application in the High Court requesting Justice Frank Seepersad to have the Court appoint a specialist obstetrician/gynaecologist, to assess the expert medical evidence tendered by the three doctors who are all contending that they were not negligent.

During a hearing of the case recently, Seepersad sounded a stern warning to Ramsoomair, that if an expert gynaecologist cannot be found by the court and he (Ramsoomair) in unable to file his expert evidence to support his claim against the doctors and the South-West Regional Health Authority (SWRHA), the Court would proceed and “the chips would have to lay where they fall”.

Ramsoomair’s wife, Chrystal Boodoo-Ramsoomair, 28, of Couva, died on March 4, 2011, at the Labour Ward of the San Fernando General Hospital (SFGH).

Her death attracted national attention when, after a C-section performed by doctors at the SFGH’s Maternity Ward to deliver her baby, she bled to death after two attempts to surgically stop internal bleeding failed. She had given birth to a girl, her third child. A post-mortem revealed that two blood vessels in the womb were not ligated (tied off).

Five doctors and six nurses were suspended, after which Government appointed a three-member team, headed by University of the West Indies lecturer in Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Dr Bharat Basaw, to investigate her death. The suspension of the doctors and nurses led to the firing of the then Acting CEO of SWRHA, Paula Chester-Cumberbatch, for failing to issue suspension letters to the doctors upon the direction of the then minister of health.

Ramsoomair filed a lawsuit against SWRHA claiming approximately $6 million for death of his wife. His claim was reduced to $3 million and then $2 million.

While the lawsuit was pending before Seepersad, during which time attorneys for Ramsoomair and SWRHA tried to negotiate a settlement, SWRHA offered Ramsoomair $300,000. However, Ramsoomair is yet to accept the money and instead, his attorneys went on to pursue a High Court claim against the doctors who are named as defendants in the lawsuit - Drs Mondira Seenath, Deepavali Ramballack and consultant gynaecologist Ashmeed Mohammed.

The doctors are challenging the lawsuit and have since filed medical expert evidence in court to support their claim that they did not act negligently. University of the West Indies lecturer in obstetrics and gynaecology, Dr Gordon Narayansingh and senior forensic pathologist Dr Valery Alexandrov, have filed witness statements on behalf of Drs Seenath, Ramballack and Mohammed.

It has been ten months now since that case has been pending for want of expert medical evidence on behalf of Ramsoomair, to assess Narayansingh and Alexandrov’s medical evidence. Senior Counsel Alvin Fitzpatrick, Jagdeo Singh, instructed by Saira Lakhan, are representing the doctors. Senior Counsel Israel Khan, attorneys Ravi Rajcoomar and Allister Khan are representing Ramsoomair.

Before the next date of hearing in December, Seepersad needs the expert medical evidence to be filed on behalf of Ramsoomair, in order to proceed with the trial. In July 2013, Ramsoomair went to the San Fernando Magistrates’ Court and filed private criminal charges against Seenath, Ramballack and Mohammed.

That case is pending, but recently when Ramsoomair’s $3 million claim against the three doctors came up for hearing before Seepersad, his attorneys petitioned the judge with an application.

The application filed on behalf of Ramsoomair by attorney Khan, states that pursuant to Part 33 of the Civil Proceedings Rules 1998, the Court should appoint a specialist obstetrician/gynaecologist as an expert witness. Khan stated that Ramsoomair has tried unsuccessfully over the past ten months, to obtain an obstetrician/ gynaecologist to give expert testimony, in order to analyse the various evidence of the Narayansingh and Alexandrov filed on behalf of the doctors.

Khan further stated in his application that he approached former Head of the Department of Obstetrics/ Gynaecology at SFGH, Dr Jehan Ali, but was told that he could not.

“I approached five specialist obstetrician/gynaecologists, but was refused by all,” Khan stated and added, “the claimant (Ramsoomair) applies to the Honourable Court for the Court to appoint a specialist obstetrician/ gynaecologist; that an expert to be appointed from the following - Dr Karen Sohan, Dr Sunil Persad and Dr Prakashbhan Persad.” Last week when the matter came up, Seepersad granted a final extension to Ramsoomair’s attorneys and fixed hearing for December.

In granting a final extension, the Judge said: “The court has an obligation to balance the rights of the parties and to also ensure that there is a proportionate use of the Court’s resources.” Recently, Ramsoomair suffered another set-back when his instructing attorney, Khan, withdrew as one of his attorneys in the private criminal manslaughter charges.

This matter has been on-going for a number of years, and has raised a whole minefield of legal and ethical questions on the medical fraternity… and fraternity it is, if this article is right. While I am in sympathy with the claimant, I feel quite a bit of nausea at the way the medical brotherhood has obviously banded together to protect their own.

Let’s start with my thoughts on Dr Jehan Ali.

“Dr Jehan Ali is on record saying that he was present on the ward seeing Mrs Ramsoomair pale and wan due to the excessive bleeding. He drew it to the attention of the nurses and doctor on duty who did nothing until it was too late.”

He was very vociferous about the medical negligence committed at the hospital, even going so far as to put his opinion on record in a video (which has mysteriously disappeared from the ‘net’). Suddenly, he has ‘boiled dong like bhagi’ and is unwilling to testify on behalf of Mr Ramsumair. What remains though, are opinions he has expressed and which were published:

• CHRYSTAL BLED TO DEATH
• Dr Jehan Ali: Death probe a waste of time
• Doctors don’t want me there—Ali
• Chrystal’s death on world news

The question now remains, “Why the about face of Ali?” I can only surmise that it is pressure from his colleagues in the medical sector. Being blackballed will certainly put an end to any further medical practice, as he could not rely on any cooperation through referrals or follow-up treatment at State institutions.

My thought also run on Dr Valery Alexandrov… how is he involved when the pathologist on record for the autopsy was Dr Hubert Daisley? Why is there no report on any documentation or statements from Daisley? Dr Gordon Narayansingh has supported the doctors who are “named as defendants in the lawsuit - Drs Mondira Seenath, Deepavali Ramballack and consultant gynaecologist Ashmeed Mohammed”. I wonder how his involvement came about when he was nowhere in the original matter?

I wonder too that Dr Basaw, from the investigation panel cannot be served a subpoena, as can Drs Ali and Daisley, to testify in this matter? Is the judicature afraid to summon doctors?

The SWRHA and apparently the Ministry of Health are also to get their share of blame… it is obvious that these institutions have rallied around the doctors. Earlier questions which I have asked have never been answered and appear to have been swept under the carpet. Or Crystal’s shroud.

Was the consultant doing a private C-section at the time of the incident where Crystal lost her life? I want readers to understand something… A doctor is put on a rota to be on-call for a period. His name appears on that rota and he is paid for being ‘on-call’ but… as you can probably see and guess, he does not have to be anywhere near the hospital premises to be paid. So, it is quite possible, and I dare say, likely, the consultant was not at work as claimed but in private practice as inside sources have revealed. The rota is not proof that he was on the job.

Advice to Mr Ramsumair. Hire an independent Ob-Gyn from the UK, let them examine the evidence and testify on your behalf. I wonder that your lawyers have not yet suggested this to you. Are they incompetent? Consider this: lawyers do have friends in the medical fraternity, and taking action against doctors can be taken personally by said doctors, so even lawyers are unwilling to cross that bridge.

I do foresee a sad end to this issue.

What is Maladministration?

The Captain asserts that maladministration is as set out in the document below. Smoke it in your pipe or not. [I’m half expecting somebody to inform me that they don’t smoke, much less for having a pipe.]

You may download, print or distribute as you please (or not). But most importantly, know what ‘Maladministration’ is.

Short code that may be texted and emailed is this: http://bit.ly/maladmin.

What is Maladministration by Captain Walker

The latest - Walker and Jumbie for awards?

Read not all about it!!

Response to a non-existent council

See here  TT Express 15 May 2014 - and below. [Select ‘Classic’ view top left to see this]

Don’t beat up the Judiciary

The Cap has not written much on Rock issues for a while. This morning I was suddenly moved by Martin Daly’s Editorial in TT Express 2013-12-07. The following is my response:

“A judiciary whose 'air supply' is so severely limited by the administrative arm of government, that it cannot reasonably demonstrate its independence, is a failed judiciary. By extension there is a failure of democracy, leaving an imbalance of the three 'powers'.

Historically the Judiciary in T&T has been abused. There is hard evidence of this. In 2009, the Judiciary requested $349M for the running of the entire court system... the Manning government granted a whopping $42.5 M. But in the same year a $65M down payment on a private jet costing some $300M, was not a problem.

I would not be surprised if similar abuse has persisted. We know governments change, but things remain more or less the same - despite all the drum-beating and promises to serve the people, near election time. I sometimes have to wonder if they were thinking 'serve the people rum and roti'.

Underperformance of the court system and delays were partially addressed by CJ Archie in his address at the opening of the 2014 law term. But one doesn't need to be a legal scholar to discern that he was just doing his best with the scraps thrown to his judiciary by the administrative arm of government. Yes - his suggestions outlined were good, and on par with changes in modern English practices. But he still has a problem for his judiciary - and he is indeed in a very difficult position because he cannot be seen to be playing politics or battling with the administrative arm.

It is very sad now that the judiciary is wearing egg on the face, for a failure of governance emanating from elsewhere.

CJ Archie needs to get out of the box - and think outside of the box. He and his closest allies need to consult with the masters of judicial strategy in places very far away. Do not rush into making comment, which will appear defensive - or lead into a political battle.

The Rt Hon Lord Judge at the 16TH COMMONWEALTH LAW CONFERENCE, HONG KONG 9TH APRIL 2009, began his speech by saying, "No one who had any reservations about the principle of judicial independence would be here. Indeed it has been the constant subtext of many of the discussions. So to begin with, at any rate, I am simply repeating what we all know. However, it bears constant repetition. First, because when we speak of judicial independence, and then speak of the rule of law, we tend to make it sound as if we have two separate concepts, when they are as closely intertwined as a mutually dependent and loving couple after many years of marriage, where one simply cannot survive without the other. And second, to remind us that we should never take either judicial dependence or the rule of law for granted. It would indeed be unwise to assume that judicial independence is inviolable. There are among us today men and women of the Commonwealth, and in one particular case men and women who are no longer of the Commonwealth, who have direct experience that it is not. And in the light of their experiences, the rest of us have humbly to recognise how fortunate we all are. Nevertheless, eternal vigilance is a necessary price, worth paying, not exclusively by judges and lawyers, encased within that mythical ivory tower so beloved of pundits and commentators, who do not understand that our daily diet reveals all we need to know about the sadnesses and tribulations of humanity, and its capacity for good and evil, but also a responsibility to be accepted by a free and independent media, as well as an alert community. ...." Read (click): full speech.

Note carefully his words 'eternal vigilance' - and you can be sure he was not implying mere vigilance. When English law lords speak, you can bet that their words 'track' much deeper.

The electorate now needs to ask itself certain questions. I can't give you a full list. But perhaps the first round should be, "What about Anand Ramlogan - the people's champion on Constitutional Law and 'rights' etc - who when a columnist pre-election would have been fighting fiercely to put right all the imbalances we see today? What has been the influence of such champions of democracy on all arms of government? Can you see such influence - can you feel it?"

These are dark and dangerous times. I don't think CJ Archie is a bad fella. I think now more than ever he needs to know that the electorate will not just beat him up (figuratively speaking, of course). We need the electorate to demonstrate much depth in their perceptions. The electorate needs to look further and deeper than just at the surface of the Courts and Judicial system. Look for the root causes of the whole mess. But whatever you do, do not sacrifice the judiciary - they are your true friends. Join the judiciary in that deep concept of 'eternal vigilance' - but just don't look on - that is not what this 'eternal vigilance' means.”

Additional reading:

1. Judiciary – not a stray dog – excellent blog by Jumbie.
2. What Archie did
3. The Rule of Law
4. Excerpts from a speech
5. What price Justice?  - from 2009.
6. Doing it right, wrong all the time
7. Judicial Emasculation  - predicted at this blog in 2008!!
8.  Insidious sneaky, sly, underhanded  - political attack on the judiciary – 2008.

Money 2.0

There’s been some recent excitement in cyberspace about a ‘new kind of money’. Some may be familiar with the term ‘Bitcoin’. Others are scratching their heads, whilst another lot are reaching for bottles of Valium and clutching their wallets, while lying spread eagle across their mattresses.

I expect to be warned about ‘Bitcoin’ and crypto-currencies, as if I don’t have any capacity to evaluate information and risk. Oh and I also expect to be called names. But when all that is done – reality still remains i.e. there is something new in cyberspace – and it doesn’t look set to go away. There are now nine crypto-currencies.

Yep – a few are now off flapping madly like wild geese. I’m also about to be educated that Bitcoin is a hoax, that the FBI had investigated, and that it’s bound to be shut down as it is illegal. Of course the people about to educate me about this are likely to know bugger all and likely to think I’m trying to get rich quick. They will have quickly done the usual Google search and gotten into a flap even more, based on information they pick up – that is not properly evaluated. See here for Bitcoin myths. Do keep in mind that Bitcoin is one of nine crypto-currencies at the moment.

Have I been conned before? Yes.  Now – you are invited to  stop wasting your time reading this – because you know all this is a load of nonsense, you know I want you to invest money and you have none (even though I’ve said nothing about encouraging anyone to get involved in this). Bye Bye.

Why are you still here? Chrysst!!

Moving swiftly on – now that the crowd has left – crypto-currencies are pretty new. What’s been all the fuss about it? Well, it’s a thing that you cannot touch but it can carry value. Helloooooo.. that’s exactly like money on your credit card, or at your bank – you can’t touch it but you have it. Oh jeez… I’m now about to be told that you can draw money out of an ATM and hold it – as if I didn’t now this. You see how I’m infantilised. Well you can do the equivalent with cryptocurrency by turning it back into ‘solid’ cash if you want.

Why are crypto-currencies likely to be big? Well, first of all they are not really currencies. They are things that people attach value to. So if it was antiques on ebay, people would have no problem with it. However, once it’s on the internet, as some kind of weird thing for geeks, it’s bound to be yet another ponzi scheme in the minds of people. The reality is that anybody could attach value to any object and resell it. So one could attach value to a one-pound coin and sell it on ebay. How much do you think people would buy it for? I hope that’s not too hard a question.

For something that does not have a fixed value, it’s what the market is willing to pay based on perceived current value or future value. What is the value in crytpo-currency? It’s a way of moving value around globally, without the usual cuts to credit card companies and banks. Who would be interested in that? A whole bunch of people in the Far East, where ‘all the money’ is.  Oh you didn’t know…. that America owes China a few trillion. Oh dear. I dunno what to say. You gotta catch up.

Did I say it was not subject to being used for drugs, porn and money laundering? Any object that can converted in value, is at the same risk of being misused, as regular money.  In general anything that can be used for good can be used for evil. Think – where is the source of the evil? Is a gun an evil thing? Oh woooo… it’s been created by the will Devil!! Ooooo.. oooo.. let’s all flap around!!

Here’s the first big risk – and it will only happen to idiots – if you lose your computer, you lose your money!! What’s the problem? It’s very similar to losing your wallet full of cash. Ooohhh.. but once it’s a computer.. hey hey..losing that is very very different. Of course it is – especially  worrying if the computer with Bitcoins had £4 million worth of electronic money on it!! Crypto-currencies do not provide a cure for stupidity – I feel compelled to say. See below:

Oh - you noticed. There are no links in this post as to how to get crypto-currency. Some will have concluded that I'm selfish and keeping it all to myself - that I'm stingy and arrogant etc. Spare me. I know what people will think before they think it. On the other hand some will know that my modus operandi is not to spoonfeed. Furthermore, if I do provide more information that leads to people taking actions and they then lose their money, they will surely blame me. Guess who is your friend? Well you know who is not.

To follow prices of crypto-currency see: Bitcoinwisdom. I’m about to be told, “It’s a volatile market, full of risk”. Thank you.

Who is malala?

She is the 16 year daughter of a BBC reporter in Pakistan – now working in the UK. Her dream was to become a doctor. Her life almost came to an abrupt end.

Malala was targeted and shot in the head in Parkistan by the Taleban on 9th October 2012 (one year ago) for promoting education of girls in the Swat valley in Pakistan. Strenuous international cooperation allowed for her to be  taken to Birmingham's Children’s Hospital where she was saved from near death.  By an amazing set of coincidences and luck – the hand of god if you wish – Malala survived, was awarded the Harvard Humanitarian of the Year Award, and was tipped to be shortlisted for the Nobel Prize for Peace.

Dr Fiona Reynolds of Birmingham’s Children’s Hospital, was in Pakistan at the time advising on transplant surgery, when she  picked up on Sky News that Malala was shot and was at death’s door. Pakistani officials asked for Dr Reyolds’ assistance. That set a chain of events in motion that led to Malala arriving in Birmingham for expert care. [Birmingham is where the Jumbie lives – that’s no secret].

Malala’s story is about luck, defying the odds and steely determination. She is an international icon that is still the target of the Taleban. Please hear/read Malala’s story in her book ‘I am Malala’ available at Audible and at Amazon Bookshop.

Malala had been politically active from 2009 and had been writing under a pseudonym as a blogger for the BBC.

Having been extremely lucky to have survived, Adnan Rasheed, a Taleban commander wrote to Malala to explain,  "Taliban believe that you were intentionally writing against them and running a smearing campaign to malign their efforts to establish Islamic system in Swat and your writings were provocative." At the end of the 4-page letter appears the words “All praises to Allah the creator of the Universe.”

Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari, announced in December 2012 that a $10 million education fund in Malala’s name would be set up.

Malala is thought to be eligible for permanent residence in the UK. I dare say she is a National Treasure and should share dual citizenship of the UK and Pakistan, by special arrangement if necessary.

What ever you do today, give time to this story and Malala’s work. It’s bigger than us. This is world-changing and life-changing.

Additional sources:

1. Malala on BBC blog 2009.
2. Portait of the girl blogger

Total Failure!

Well, well, many a rock-crawler – now renamed by me as ‘heap-crawler’, will understand where I’m coming from on this commentary – but I expect some will be ‘blue vex’ about me criticising their beloved gobar-heap at a distance. Yuh know – I should ‘come dong and wallow in dey heap’ in solidarity, before I’m worthy of critical comment – and I’ve always given short shrift to such rubbish. So here goes!

A Nation is plunged into darkness due to a total power failure (i.e. electricity power outage) between 00:45AM and approximately 08:00AM on 29th March 2013. This led to the Prime Minister of the ‘banana republic’ getting involved and putting the Nation on high alert. According to Newsday 2013-03-30 the country’s water supply, hospitals, the national traffic light grid, national television stations, cellular phone services and even bank ATM machines were all affected to varying degrees. According to the TT Express this fiasco was caused by a ‘gas supply problem’.

Oh? Gas supply problem? What does that really mean? It means nothing – unless you are a naive idiot who accepts everything at the most superficial level. But assuming you’re not so naive, how does a whole country of 1.3 Million people just get shut down for a gas supply problem? Would that be due to ‘human error’ that caused the problem or would that be related to gas coming out of the earth running low in supply – would be the first two things to come to my mind.

But I know heap crawlers. They will probably be happy to accept that it was a ‘computer failure’ or  ‘was ah accident’ or some rubbishy explanation like that. Well not me!! I doh eat nice. I would want ‘heads on sticks’! I was gonna be hopping mad! Even if the gas supply coming from the earth was running low; if I was running a country. I would want to know about it years in advance, not suddenly in the middle of the night!

On this monumental balls up, the “…blackout gained international coverage by foreign media houses, including the Washington Post, New York Times, Tampa Tribune and Miami Herald. United States television networks ABC News and CNN also reported the story, saying the blackout was caused by a problem with the natural gas supply in Trinidad and a subsequent failure at a plant in Tobago. Yahoo News also reported the incident and quoted part of Persad-Bissessar’s statement after the blackout. There was also a post of the blackout on the New England Cable News.” according to the TT Guardian (2013-03-29). In their report it was clear to see that this was the third major power failure in the country in three years.

I had direct reports from ‘The Heap’ that many people were worried that the power failure was part of a coup d’etat. People were vigilant and preparing for the worst. You see, heap-crawlers, are used to power outages which could occur with a frequency of daily to a few times per month – each of these for maybe around 2 – 4 hours. So, when they realised that this power outage was for some 8 hours, and affected the whole country, they would be right to worry.

But seriously, is that the way to live life in a Nation that is blessed with so much natural energy resources and with some very intelligent people (amongst the usual crop of dunceys). On the heap, people have adapted at their own expense, to buying the traditional ‘Delco’ (home power generator), water tanks to buffer against the regular interruptions of water supply, and of late many heap-crawlers have built steel cages around their houses - and armed themselves with weapons to protect their homes and loved ones.

No! No! NO! This is not the way for any set of people to live – other than in some sub-third-world country. To find any argument which justifies the status quo, is nothing less than pure dunceyness, as evident above! QED.

Diplomatic Immunity?

The situation on the Rock has gone completely ridiculous.

Sometime ago, News agencies reported that a certain minister's sons were debarred from leaving the United States. Subsequent reports have revealed that “Daryan Warner, the son of National Security Minister Jack Warner, was a cooperating witness for the FBI and Internal Revenue Service (IRS)."

The FBI and IRS are probing corruption into FIFA and "among the issues being probed are allegations involving ‪Jack Warner, a former FIFA Vice President, who resigned the ‪position June 2011 amid allegations of bribery." Among the allegations are offshore payments to Chuck Blazer over a 20 year period.

 

Since at least the summer of 2011, the FBI has been examining more than $500,000 (330,600 pounds) in payments made by the Caribbean Football Union (CFU) over the past 20 years to an offshore company headed by top U.S. football official Chuck Blazer. That was a period during which Jack Warner was also head of the CFU, a position he held from the early 1980s until 2011. [Reuters]

 

In spite of the seriousness of these reports, the Prime Minister has refused to remove Jack from his post pending investigations. While nothing has been proven, Trinidad and Tobago is a laughing stock of the world. Here we have a person under investigation for corruption leading the security forces (who would have to cooperate with the US authorities). The silence of the PM is astounding, as is that of the AG, the leader of the COP (Prakash Ramadhar) et al.

 

To make matters more ridiculous, reports have indicated that Jack is fearful of entering US space but as Minister of National Security, can very well issue himself a diplomatic passport. What does this mean? Does this mean that he can visit the United States on the diplomatic immunity and return? Will the USA recognise diplomatic immunity if Jack issues himself a diplomatic passport?

Not even in his best and most creative moments could Shakespeare have created such a scene. Neither could Ralph Maharaj for that matter.

Still, Vernon De Lima has the last word:

"He is entitled to have his side of the story heard, and I am confident that he would shortly visit the USA and clear up all those allegations that may very well be spurious. It is only fair to him, after all.”

The Rule of Law – part 2

Apologies for my long absence. I was on vacation in the Ukraine, but also occupied with a lot of course work for my current module at Open University. Also, the sheer crap I see daily in the news is a blight on my good mood and enthusiasm, so I avoided it for many weeks to rebuild my strength to carry on.

In returning to the Rule of Law, I hope to share with readers the wisdom of Lord Bingham, one of the most recognised legal minds of our times. On 16th November 2006 the Centre for Public Law held the sixth in the series of lectures in honour of Sir David Williams [Emeritus Rouse Ball Professor of English Law and Emeritus Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge University]. The lecture, simply entitled "The Rule of Law" was given by The Rt. Hon Lord Bingham of Cornhill KG, House of Lords. This lecture was later expanded into a fuller analysis and published by Penguin Books.

THE RULE OF LAW 2006

Above is the transcript of the lecture, and below is a video of the original lecture.

Lord Bingham argues that there are eight conditions for the rule of law to work:

1. the law should apply equally to all;
2. it should not be accessible only to the rich, meaning that disputes should be solved relatively cheaply;
3. it must be easy to understand;
4. it must protect fundamental human rights;
5. it must be speedily enforced;
6. the right to a fair trial is a cardinal requirement;
7. public officials should not abuse their powers; and, finally,
8. States should respect international law.

In the interest of keeping this post short, and to give readers time to assimilate and digest the two embedded files above, I will stop here and continue with an analysis of Lord Bingham’s lecture, as written by several legal authors.

When animals behave like humans

Security officers beating customer

This video was hard to take in, especially hearing that old man squealing.

 

Police duncey slaps man

No explanations needed.

The Bloggers’ Press

Bloggers unite!! Let us declare our INDEPENDENCE on or before 31st August 2012.

We are totally fed up of traditional media inappropriately censoring the people and our comments, when no policy, and no moral or legal principle, has been breached.

The actions of traditional media are wrong especially on the Rock. They grossly infringe our rights to freedom of expression.

Spread the word through the blogosphere, that we will be creating a BLOGGERS' PRESS! This will go live online very soon. Yes - this is where we will collectively deal with the issues - as we see fit. We will be accountable for what we produce.

There will be unlimited space for citizens to speak freely in an accountable way - true freedom of expression will be yours.

If you are a blogger or an aggrieved citizen and you wish to be part of this effort, please express your interest and thoughts by a comment below. Alternatively email Jumbie or me. My email address is walker.captain@gmail.com

You can text this blog from your phones to others by sending this: http://bit.ly/jw-bloggers-press

United we stand – a force to be reckoned with! Let’s do it. Yes you can!

Assessing accountability

The definition of accountability is not very sharp, from sources accessible via the internet. I decided to define the concept as I see it. I thought hard about persons in my life who I had considered to be ‘accountable’. I drew up a list of descriptors and then grouped them as shown below in my definition.

Accountability (defined) is the demonstration of:

1. Trustworthiness
   1. openness, honesty, and probity.
2. Responsibility for actions
   1. a willingness to explain actions.
   2. acceptance of responsibility for the consequences of actions, decisions or omissions.
3. Mutuality
1. playing by an agreed set of rules.
2. demonstrating commitment to achieving standards, goals and values.
4. Sound performance
1. performing in a measurable evidence-based way.
5. Willingness to maintain trust by the active avoidance of influences that may undermine the above factors.

As with almost all definitions, the above is unlikely to be complete. The concept may evolve with time, as I learn more. You may add to the above by introducing your own ideas about accountability.

I assert that any person, entity or system that exerts (or purports to exert) power or control over the lives of people needs to be accountable. However, accountability comes in various forms and may reach in to several spheres of our existence.

How it’s done in America

Watch!

Absolute power

Two weeks ago, I blogged about the Marlene Coudray situation and the Congress Of the People’s (COP) position… I speculated whether the COP would dissolve the partnership and walk. I predicted "no".

It turns out, once again, I have been correct in my assessment… Today the newspapers have revealed that the leadership of the COP has boiled down like the proverbial 'bhagi'.

1. Trinidad Express:- COP-OUT ON MARLENE
2. Trinidad Guardian:- COP backs down on Coudray
3. Trinidad Newsday:- COP gets ‘options’ for loss of San Fernando mayorship

People should remember that COP was created and entered politics under the catchphrase "new politics". New politics turned out to be the same as "old politics". In other words, serve yourself before you "serve the people, serve the people, serve the people". For the price of a ministerial salary, and perks, the rank-and-file of the COP has to watch its leaders grovel, and become emasculated.

With the dying PNM, ineffective independent senators, and partners who are unable to check the rampage of the UNC, we have the makings of another creeping dictatorship, and an untrammelled opportunity for power.

"Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it" … William Pitt the Elder, Earl of Chatham (1770).

"… Absolute power corrupts the very best of natures"… Alphonse Marie Louis de Prat de Lamartine (1848)

 Now, some may say I am being paranoid. I wonder if I am… I correctly saw Patrick Manning’s trend to ‘a creeping dictatorship’ which was also confirmed by several independent writers (political analysts, journalists and lawyers). I have noticed a trend of turning back upon the promises made upon the electoral platforms, and written in the party’s Manifesto. Now, who is there to stop this downward slide?

Two years gone, and I am seeing no attempt to rein in Prime Ministers ‘till death do us part’ reign. What happened to ‘two terms’ as promised? What happened to right of recall of non-performing MPs? Instead we got a vote for an increase in salary. Okay, I confess, I agree no increase was voted since 2006, but… will the MP's increase reflect the 5% or 9% cap given to others? I hardly think so.

So we are back to seeing things like Reshmigate, Marlenegate, Cherylgate etc.

In the meantime, children are being abused and murdered, and extra-judicial killings by dunceys appear to be on the rise. We also have MPs commenting before matters have been fully investigated (not that I expect such investigations to be fair or independent).

As the Captain always says, the substrata is a powerful thing, and I wonder how much of the substrata is manipulated into accepting the trends I am seeing… and the defence of same.

Insightless..shameless and spineless

Well dee Cap has been stalking the Silk issue for some time in the background, gathering thoughts and analysing the situation very carefully. This story about Silk has been in the media almost every day for two weeks. What’s the big deal some will say – it doh change dee price of corfee (aka coffee).

But boy, today ah couldn’t contain meh self no more. Ah buss. Dee mark buss!! So ah have tuh let off some steam prematurely. What trigger all dis? Well.. ah read dis article in Newsday - PM on Silk: Point the way forward. Eh? Forward? I’s more like backwardness getting in dee way. Den some so-called Analyst talk a pile o’ cuhraap (aka crap) in the Guardian – Analyst on Silk affair: Gov’t now looking at damage control.  But you doh have to be a lawyer to figure that the comments of the PM quoted in Newsday are not about damage control at all! It’s about ‘I wrong and I strong.. so eef how much ever other people do it .. i’s okay for me’ (jess to be clear the PM never said those words – but that is the attitude portrayed). Well pardners I had to let it rip in a Guardian forum. See below and here (it may have been removed from the Guardian because we all know how the media does censor the most straight talking and sensible opinions, but allow utter garbage – Jumbie could tell yuh bout it.)

The so-called analyst need a kick up the jacksey if you arks me!! The analyst is probably paid to cover up the whole blunder.
"She noted that former attorney general Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, who has strongly condemned the acceptance of silk by the PM, was the one who created the position of senior counsel, a local version of Queen’s Counsel."
Dis analyst cyah see dee issue at all at all. Hand picked I imagine. The issue is not who created SC - jeezaaan ages!! Ayye.. you know how dohtish dat line of thinking looking - hear nuh - it have people from all over the world does read deeze papers eh.. ah mean what impression such simplistic thinking go give people? Dat allyuh still swinging on vines? Oh gord man!

Dis is not a matter of merely attempting to bribe the judiciary. But lets deal with that first. Did the AG and the PM really think they could do that? If so it is the most childish and naive of bribes ever attempted.

Dee real ketchass is dat the AG and two key members of the Judicary couldn't see the obvious breach of the doctrine of separation of powers - a thing that would be obvious to any average 1st year law student. And what about the AG - Mr Separation of Powers himself - couldn't be bothered in the 'mad rush'!! I neva see such nonsense in my life!!

Few seem to care much about the issue of effectively decorating one's self with an honour. Normally that is called narcissism. But hey ho - ah guess allyuh dong on dat Rock a'right wid dat.. allyuh see nuff of it a'ready.. so is no big ting eh.

Den you have Fuad jumpin eeh tuh mouth off how is not the AG fault... how it was done before. In other words if crap has been done before is no big t'ing, jes continue merrily on to repeat.

And to crown it off now - the Prime Minister has laid down what she sees some kinda challenge. What? You eh hear bout it? Wakey wakey.

The PM has made statements which may suggest that if none of the people over the last 50 years hand back dey silk she holdin orn to she one!! She said, "..Should you take that route, every person to receive Silk under those criteria and those who for the past 50 years from 1962 down, are you then saying everyone should give back Silk? I think the answer is no. If we are to review the system and progress as we do in other institution that will point to the way forward”. And this is the abyssmally low level of analytical thought you get from a silk? I'm speechless. What  self-justificatory rhetorical nonsense of a question is that? (two can play the game eh).

The issues Mrs PM are not:

1. whether those who received silk over the last 50 years ought to return their silk.
2. that a precondition to your handing back your silk is that those so decorated over 50 years should hand back their silk first – ah mean how childish can one actually get?

The issues Mrs PM and Mr Separation of Powers are:

1. that you have discovered that the effective self-award of silk upon yourselves is viewed with the moral contempt it deserves,
2. that very learned and respectable legal opinion has informed you reliably, in no uncertain terms, that the award driven by you all in cahoots (directing the President), is in breach of the doctrine of separation of powers - a serious legal mistake for anyone worthy of Silk to make.
3. that both of you need to demonstrate more self-awareness and respect for people with (and without) intelligence. People are not all totally stupid. You have discovered that you made mistake - or should I say 'mistep'. But the pattern as with the Reshmi Ramnarine debacle - you playing wrong and strong! This is an issue of National importance. Adherence to principle should stand above all - and you should be a beacon of light and leadership – not merely trying to justify your mistakes on a foundation of such utter drivel. 

However, the monkey pants that you and the AG find yourselves in now, is one where you’re wondering whether the handing back of the Silk awards will be an admission of yet another 'mistep'. You worried no ass that yet another admission of a mistep will effect your fall from power.

Remember this 'Serve the people.. serve the people.. serve the people'. Um err.. that doesn’t mean serve ‘food’ eh. It means serve all that is right to the people – fairness as well. That means, ‘it's not about you.. it's not about you.. it's not about you.’  Right?

Thought for tomorrow

“The single thing that underpins the actions of a suicide bomber and the healing hands of a doctor, is the belief that it is right to do what they do. A sense of righteousness and justification, is therefore a powerful double-edged sword – one that can be wielded for good or for evil. It is when we know we are right, that we need to exercise the most caution and consideration – especially where our actions may affect large populations and systems of governance.”

- Captain Walker (Nov 2011).

The power equation

 

Power – Control = Chaos + Abuse

1. Power   = force / command / influence / ability to change
2. Control = restraint / proportionality / direction / alignment / focus
3. Chaos   = disorder / destruction / fragmentation / degeneration / recklessness / arbitrariness
4. Abuse   = torture / unjust suffering / moral corruption / unequal treatment / unfair discrimination

        - Captain Walker 2010

What is not freedom..

 

“Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch. Freedom comes from the recognition of certain rights which may not be taken, not even by a 99% vote.”

- Marvin Simkin