Ramesh: Even the UNC acted contrary to law

SENIOR COUNSEL Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj said yesterday that since 1976, Governments, including his own United National Congress (UNC), have been acting contrary to law by appointing members to the Industrial Court. Maharaj said that over the years, the Governments operated with the authority that Cabinet had the competence to appoint members of the Industrial Court. He said the Industrial Relations Act, which governs appointments, was passed with a special majority. “But over the years, that has been wrong. All the Governments have acted contrary to law,” Maharaj submitted. “Although there was an error in applying the law, it does not mean that what happened before was not valid. It permits the court to deal with it now. If the law was invalid, it invites the court to deal with it. Where there was a wrong, it must be corrected,” Maharaj declared.

Maharaj, along with Rikki Harnanan and Darrell Allahar, are representing Sam Maharaj in his judicial review case over the decision of the Cabinet not to re-appoint him a member of the Industrial Court. Martin Daly SC and Elton Prescott are appearing for Prime Minister Patrick Manning, who is also the head of the Cabinet. Hearing continues on March 9 before Justice David Myers in the Port-of-Spain Fourth Civil Court. Maharaj addressed the issue of the doctrine of the separation of power between the executive and the judiciary. “It applies to all the courts, not only the Supreme Court of Judicature, but also to the Magistrates’ Courts. It is not limited to the Superior Courts, but also to the Industrial Court which is a Superior Court of Record, tribunals set up by statute, and even the Tax Appeal Board.”

Maharaj pointed out that the Industrial Court is engaged in the protection of the rights to the enjoyment of property. He said this court has to observe the fundamental rights in performing its functions. He said it is engaged in the protection of the values of the constitution. “The aim of the judicial independence is to ensure there is no political or outside interference, or pressure on any of the persons who sit in a judicial capacity. The judges must not be exposed to political interference. No pressure, political or otherwise, must be brought directly or indirectly. “The court must not only be independent of Government, but the court must not be perceived by the public to be a part of the Government, be subservient of the Government, or an arm of the Government. The section of the IRA gives the impression of political interference in the appointment of members of the Industrial Court,” counsel added.