‘I want nothing from PM’

CHIEF JUSTICE Sat Sharma made it quite clear in his judicial review application that he and Prime Minister Patrick Manning has had heated exchanges since he became Chief Justice in 2002. “I had to inform the PM that I never sought his assistance or any favours from him, that I wanted nothing from him for myself and that power and position never meant anything to me.” Sharma filed for judicial review of the decision of the Prime Minister to represent to the President that a tribunal be appointed to investigate whether he should be removed from office. Sharma was granted leave last Wednesday by Justice Humphrey Stollmeyer who also granted an injunction blocking the appointment of the tribunal pending the hearing and determination of the judicial review application. Hearing was adjourned to April 28.

Among the documents filed in court was a statement by Attorney General John Jeremie which was handed over to the Chief Justice by the Prime Minister in error. In that document, Jeremie opened by saying he was drafting this statement on the advice of the acting Chief Justice Roger Hamel-Smith. Sharma said after his appointment in 2002, he held his first meeting with Manning at which he raised a number of issues. One included the practice of the executive whereby the names of the judges or other judicial officers who had to go on foreign travel would have to be disclosed in the Note to Cabinet for approval for their travel to be granted by Cabinet.

Sharma said he was not in favour of this, saying the judiciary was a separate and independent arm of the State. “I further challenged the rationale for the practice and indicated that it could be seen as political. The PM did not accept my position in this regard and insisted that it was the practice to name the officers concerned in matters presented for Cabinet approval and that there was no reason why judges should not conform.” Sharma said he also raised the questioning of funding for the judiciary, pointing out that the judiciary and the magistracy in particular had been starved of adequate funds over the last several years.

“I complained that the judiciary always had to be begging for funds which were rarely forthcoming. The meeting became heated to the point I had to inform the PM that I never sought his assistance or any favours from him, that I wanted nothing from him for myself and that power and position never meant anything to me.” Sharma said another bone of contention was the Government’s intention to relocate the Port-of-Spain Magistrates’ Court to the Trinidad House. He said he heard about it from the media, and no one in Government consulted with him. The Chief Justice said he was against the Magistrates’ Court being moved to Trinidad House. He remained adamant that there would be no relocation until proper alternative accommodation was found, and until there were discussions between the Government, the Judiciary and the Law Association.