Judiciary needs damage control

Already there is scepticism in the population about the quality of service being given by the judges and magistrates. The most serious criticism is that the system is geared to favour the wealthy and punish the poor. Gross delays and inefficiencies abound. There have been apparent inconsistencies in sentences handed down in similar cases. There is more than a whiff of political interference real or perceived in the judicial process.

The new allegations and counter allegations between two senior judicial officers deal a further blow to the already fragile reputation of the judiciary. But it does more than that. Arising, as it does in a case involving the former Leader of the Opposition, it lends credence to the popular perception of political interference in the justice system in this country. Fuelling this suspicion is the “overkill” nature of the sentence given to Mr Panday and the gyrations both at magisterial and judicial levels in treating with the simple straightforward question of bail.

The reason given for granting Mr Panday his entitlement to bail was farcical. Less than three months previously the same Mr Panday voluntarily opted to go to jail and refused bail. Was his state of health then any different or had it deteriorated dramatically as a result of the sentence? Even Mr Panday’s attorney compounded the farce by apologising for not having mentioned to the magistrate that Mr Panday was gravely ill. Only time will tell how ill a rejuvenated Basdeo Panday really is.

However, once there is the slightest suggestion that there was interference with the trial process in Mr Panday’s case, then the decision cannot be permitted to stand. It does not matter whether the interference was designed to acquit or to convict him. The process will have to start all over again before a new magistrate. The quicker this matter comes up in the Court of Appeal the better it will be for the country.

Confidence in the commercial institutions of the country will also probably be severely tested both nationally and internationally. Without passing any judgment on the evidence in Panday’s case, it has been revealed that a significant figure in the commercial sector invested the reputation and integrity of the large commercial institution he heads in an essentially political enterprise. Financial assistance by firms to political parties is an acceptable method of financing the political process. Increasingly in other countries, limits are being imposed on the level of contributions one can make to political parties. This is so as to diminish outside influence in the political process. However, identification with a political party carries an obvious political and commercial risk. This risk is considerably increased where the contribution is made directly to individual political figures. The presumption is that the assistance is made for the purpose of keeping that person “sweet.” In the United States there is a special body, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which tracks such payments. Serious damage has been done to companies that have been found guilty of making improper payments to influence the political process.

Given the dominant position of the group of companies represented by the person who admitted assisting Mr Panday’s family, it will be difficult to forecast what damage if any will result. One thing is clear. The conglomerate is so large and diverse that if it sneezes not only Trinidad and Tobago but the entire Caribbean might get a cold. Hopefully that organisation is doing some serious in-depth succession planning.

What does one do? If one sticks to basic principles one never goes wrong. Do what is right and let the chips fall where they will. Principles are no respecter of position, office or political persuasion. The high and the low must be treated equally without fear of favour.