Jagdeo’s lawsuit lacks morality

Jul 15, 2010 Editorial

The British legal system which this country has adopted is most interesting. It first of all presumes that a person is innocent until proven guilty but at the same time, it removes that person’s freedom or causes that person to suffer some pain and embarrassment until the matter is determined.
One may argue that it is so in every country, but more glaring in some than in others. Sometimes, innocent people do suffer, going to jail for long periods because of the weight of the personality of the accuser. For example, if a woman reports that a man has raped her, then the society and the courts readily conclude that there must be some truth to the allegation. The man is no longer innocent until proven guilty although the law so dictates.
In the United States, for example, people are now being released, in increasing numbers, from the prisons after spending decades behind bar on wrongful convictions. That many of these sufferers are black people, suggests that from the inception, the society and the courts presumed guilt before innocence, rather than the way things should be.
Those shortcomings apart, the system works in that country. For example, the court leans heavily in favour of fair comment on the part of reporters. It also looks with a most disinterested eye on public figures who seek to prosecute reporters for claims of defamation. More often than not, public figures find it extremely difficult to prove a charge of defamation and when they do, the punitive damages are small, very small.
The United States legal system is such that no President has ever claimed, successfully, that he has been libeled or slandered. We know of none who had to go to the court seeking damages. These days, people say the darnedest things about President Barack Obama and by no stretch of imagination would the US President approach the court for redress.
His office would respond to some of the allegations. Other sections of his staff would seek to correct those shortcomings for which he may be responsible. From time to time he would be critical of one section of the media but he is forced to limit his criticism because regardless of how trashy is that media unit, it is considered integral to the entire media network. Others would rise to its defence against the president.
But there is a basic observation. The president of the United States appoints the judges to the Supreme Court as is done in Guyana. However, the court system in that country is multi-layered. Some judges are appointed to serve in the lower courts by other means and systems. The president has nothing to do with their appointment. And they would never hear litigation filed by the President.
In Guyana the matter is either in the lower court— the Magistrates’ Court—or in the High Court also called the Supreme Court. The judges here (as opposed to magistrates) are appointed by the President. It is here that we have a serious problem. President Bharrat Jagdeo is going before the very people who have every reason to feel beholden to him to seek redress against Kaieteur News. This is most unusual. Immediately the defendants could be at a severe disadvantage.
The court always argues that it is independent and judges have been known to rule independent of public pressure. However, all those who have done so have testified to pressure from quarters not divorced from the political directorate. There was Justice William Ramlal who ruled against the state in the matter of the Chancellor and the Chief Justice. He may never be appointed to the Guyana Court of Appeal.
There are other judges who are still awaiting confirmation. One could imagine if the matter of President Jagdeo’s litigation should go before one of them, as is likely to be the case. Their ruling may influence whether they continue to be acting judges or get confirmation.
People may argue that Forbes Burnham sued the Catholic Standard. When he did he was Prime Minister and the appointment of judges was beyond him. No President in Guyana’s 30-year history of the presidency has ever sought redress in the courts. President Bharrat Jagdeo seems destined to make history.

Latest News

Jagdeo’s lawsuit lacks morality

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | December, 2nd, 2024

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Alarm in West Indies over radical two-division plan for Test cricket

After 18 years hiatus, West Indies arrive in...

Uniting through Futsal

Westside Golf Course Opens 2025 with $100K...

Hardaiow, Mahabeer cop best batter and bowler...

FL Sport extends support to Polly’s Nursery...

Features/Columnists

The Horse Racing Authority Bill will solve nothing!

Forget Begging Rich Nations: Caribbean Countries Should Act to Save Themselves

Guyanese at the movies

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

Jagdeo’s lawsuit lacks morality

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | December, 2nd, 2024

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]