CJ matter goes to police

AS prime Minister Patrick Manning yesterday moved on two fronts against the Chief Justice, the Commissioner of Police was brought into the picture.

The story of the complaint against Sharma by Chief Magistrate Sherman Mc Nicolls, may unfold further when the Prime Minister addresses Parliament on the issue today at 1.30 pm.

In a release issued yesterday, Manning stated he had referred a report sent to him by the Chief Magistrate, to the Attorney General “for appropriate action.”

The Attorney General has in turn, “forwarded the complaints of the Honourable Chief Magistrate and other supporting information, including a statement of prosecutor Sir Timothy Cassel QC, to the Commissioner of Police and the Director of Public Prosecutions for such action as they might consider appropriate,” according to a statement from the AG.

The AG stated that Cassel gave a “corroborating account” regarding the complaint by Mc Nicolls. (See Letters on Page 10A).

Mc Nicolls’ complaint centres around a reported attempt to influence the verdict in the recent case against former Prime Minister Basdeo Panday, a matter over which Mc Nicolls presided.

The Prime Minister’s two-pronged approach in dealing with this issue, involves once again impeachment proceedings.

In the Whitehall release, Manning, announced that he had also “informed the Chief Justice that he had begun the process under Section 137 of the Constitution to determine whether the Chief Justice ought to be removed from Office.”

This is the second time in twelve months that Manning has invoked Section 137 of the Constitution.

This procedure would involve the establishment of a Tribunal to investigate the complaint against the CJ.

According to Section 137, the Tribunal is appointed “to inquire into the matter and report on the facts thereof to the President and recommend to the President whether he should refer the question of the removal of the Chief Justice from office to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.” The Privy Council, after consideration, confirms or rejects the recommendations.

Manning had begun similar proceedings against the CJ last April, after receiving allegations (of interference) from the DPP and the Attorney General.

On that occasion the CJ was accused of suggesting to the DPP and the AG that the prosecution of Dr Vijay Naraynsingh for the murder of his second wife, Dr Chandra Naraynsingh, be aborted.

The Tribunal was named but not appointed because the CJ was granted leave for judicial review of the decision of the Prime Minister to have the CJ investigated.