A supermarket incident and the nonsense judges do in Guyana

Feb 20, 2014 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

The things big companies get away with in this God-forsaken hell-hole named Guyana would never be allowed in other countries. And they escape because no one criticizes the judges for some of the barefaced nonsense many of these judges do to poor people. Judges in this country make decisions many of which are based on class prejudice.
Last Sunday I shared a forum with Nigel Hughes at Saints Stanislaus College; the topic was the Colwyn Harding brutality issue. The attorney told the packed audience that it makes no sense for poor people to sue the State because the lawyer’s fee would be more than what the judges will award in compensation.
This atrocious state of affairs in the judiciary in Guyana is as old as Planet Earth. And no one denounces it either out of fear that one day they will have to appear in front of the named magistrate or judge. In such a circumstance, you can ask for the officer to recuse him/herself.
For example, I have been acerbically critical of magistrates Clive Nurse and Sueanna Lovell, and Chief Justice (ag) Ian Chang. Justice Chang contacted the newspaper for a retraction of a part of my column on him. It is left up to me and me alone to decide whether I will get a fair trial from these three officers. It is my right to publicize a fear I have. My lawyer can advise me against raising the issue. I can lose the application to have the officer be recused but I will express the fear I have.
The second reason why citizens are afraid to criticize judicial decisions is because the tradition has been that this area of life in the functionalism of Guyana is off limits. So people out of respect do not want to be seen adversely commenting on what a judge or magistrate does. But trust me, they are quite a number of judges and magistrates whose learning can be questioned and whose decisions should be debated.
I do not know about the merits and demerits of Justice Insanally’s ruling in favour of a gold miner over an Amerindian village. But what I certainly welcomed was the large torchlight the Guyana Human Rights Association put the judgement under, using trenchant comments to show the organization’s disagreement with the ruling.
It helps democracy and it checks the excesses of judicial officers when citizens speak out on court decisions that they find either too harsh, bordering on the abuse of the law or inherently flawed. It also deters magistrates and judges from being recklessly irresponsible. And believe me I have seen exasperatingly questionable decisions from the judiciary that damage even further the corrugated image of this lost nation.
Back to attorney, Hughes. If as Mr. Hughes contends that poor people are at a disadvantage because they have to pay lawyers only to find out that the courts awarded them a sum lower that what their legal fees were, then it can be safely concluded that the poor are without entitlement, a term beautifully expounded on by the 21st century leading philosopher and Nobel Laureate, Amartya Sen.
Sen is the successor to the great John Rawls and has penned one of the best books ever written on justice since Plato’s “The Republic” two thousand years ago.
“The Idea of Justice,” (Harvard Univ. Press, Boston, 2009) is a book that will captivate you from opening chapter one until the last page. I suggest the Chancellor makes it required reading for all magistrates and judges. The people of Guyana should demand that Clement Rohee and the Commissioner of Police read it. I am willing to lend it to all the judges and magistrates and Minister Rohee and Commissioner Brumell.
So will the poor shopper get justice from the supermarket that stripped her in front of a house of shoppers only to find she did steal not even a banana as carried in a letter in the Stabroek News this week? No, she will not get justice. First the supermarket owner will say, “Not us, is the guard did that.”
This is dishonest because under contract law, the guard was operating as an employee of the supermarket. Secondly, which judge, looking at that woman, her sartorial paraphernalia, and her station in life will go beyond $100,000? Thirdly, which judge will go against the particular family that owns that the supermarket? Justice in Guyana is like spoilt milk – it damages your stomach and makes you vomit.

Latest News

A supermarket incident and the nonsense judges do in Guyana

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | November, 20th, 2024

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Wharton’s brilliance propels Chase’s Academic to another Republic...

Seales’ 4 for 5 gives West Indies control...

WARRIORS BOUNCE BACK AGAINST HAMPSHIRE

Victoria go top with second win

GFF and Namilco officially launch Maid Marian...

GFF celebrates the successful completion of...

Features/Columnists

The PPPC does not practice political inclusion

Haiti: Tragically Descending into Deeper Crisis

What’s going on with this $100,000 cash grant?

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

A supermarket incident and the nonsense judges do in Guyana

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | November, 20th, 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 […]