APPOINTMENT OF SENIOR COUNSEL SHOULD CONCERN EVERYONE

Jan 06, 2017 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
The recent appointment of Senior Counsel (SC) by the President of Guyana may not concern most of us too much. This is seemingly not as sensitive as the revocation of the Cheddi Jagan Research Centre lease by the government; and it certainly is not as sensational. But believe me when I say that it should concern every one of us. The issues are far more serious than they may first appear. However, I think that we should put into context the appointment of SC before we examine the full weight of the government’s actions.
It is imperative that I note that what follows is primarily a condensation of the historical and contemporary facts relative to the appointment of SC. For this purpose I have had recourse to good old fashion Google; the 2015 Trinidad and Tobago Law Association commissioned Report on the appointment of SC in Trinidad and Tobago (courtesy of Attorney-at-Law Selwyn Pieters); and a quite extensive letter penned by Karl Hudson-Phillips QC (published in Trinidad Newsday Newspapers on January 4, 2012).
The legal system of Guyana, and most English-speaking territories in the Region, is primarily the Common Law System. In simple terms, the material feature of our legal system was inherited from England through colonisation. Even today most of our laws are just a carbon copy of antique English colonial laws. In 1597 in England the first Queen’s Counsel (QC) was appointed (the term used is ‘given a patent’). The title was enlarged to include King’s Counsel (KC) in 1603. The appointment is made by the monarch of the day, whether queen or king; hence the corresponding reference of Queen’s and King’s Counsel. It is really an honour conferred on the most eminent lawyers who have distinguished themselves in practice over a stipulated period of time. You must have heard the term ‘Silk’ in reference to senior attorneys; this is because upon appointment, the senior attorneys wear silk gowns. Like our laws, the practice of elevating senior attorneys was handed down to us in the Region. After we (countries in the Region) attained independence we changed the name of the title to Senior Counsel, while retaining its substance.
Guyana last appointed SC in 1996. On Saturday, December 31, 2016 the Ministry of Presidency announced the appointments of nine (9) persons as SC effective as at January 1, 2017. The persons appointed are Neil Boston; Charles Fung-A-Fat; Roxane George-Wiltshire; Llewelyn John; Vidyanand Persaud; Rosalie Robertson; Rafiq Khan; Claudette Singh; and Basil Williams. The core criteria for the appointment of SC in Guyana appear to be ‘exemplary experience, erudition, excellence, and diligence in the practice of the law’. Most of these names may be unpopular to most of us. Included in this list are practicing judges and non-practicing attorneys. What is wrong with this? Well here is where we start to examine why the President’s appointment of some of these persons (and non-appointment of others) is worrisome.
It has been customary since the appointment of QC/KC (and now SC) to confer this honour on practicing members of the Bar (the formal name for the general body of attorneys); meaning attorneys who are actually appearing in court to defend clients. A Senior Counsel, ideally, is the standard bearer of the profession. He or she sets the standards of skill and conduct all other attorney should aspire to achieve. This is no small responsibility. In England and Wales for instance there is what is called a ‘Competency Framework’ which stipulates the qualities which must be possessed by persons charged with the heavy responsibility of being a QC/KC (or SC).
In brief, these senior practitioners must be experts in the law whose knowledge is always current and relevant; their oral and written advocacy must be exceptional; they must have an impeccable working relationship with their clients, the courts and other stakeholders in the justice system; their comprehension of diversity and the spectrum of cultural issues, coupled with their ability to promote equality, must be strongly persuasive; and their integrity must be beyond reproof, this in observance of their oath, the Legal Profession Act and the ethics of the profession. This list is more expansive in Trinidad and Tobago. It is not feasible for me to give an exhaustive list here.
You see my people, the role of the legal profession in the preservation of our democratic way of life is little understood and often trifled with, sadly both by the practitioners and the lay person alike.
The public engages attorneys, who have taken an oath to skilfully and honourably advance the causes of the citizens, with the objective of maintaining civil decency and preserving the rule of law. These factors are at the heart of the democratic process; and should be had regard to, even in a society like ours which pretends to be a democracy. It follows logically that if the standard bearers of the legal profession are appointed in a manner contrary to what is customary then this infraction is a stake in the heart of our democracy. If the standard bearers of our legal profession do not conform to the strictest criteria for appointment as SC then this too is a stake in the heart of our democracy.
Ronald J. Daniels

---

---