The people of Tobago depend heavily on the inter-island service, so it’s really Tobagonians who are being punished.

However, it is my view (and that of many other ferry users) that the presence of security officers makes little difference in the behaviour of rowdy and destructive passengers other than adhering to the no-smoking zones.

In the presence of a full security shift, passengers often play loud music and put up their feet on the chairs and tables while the officers pretend not to notice.

A fellow passenger had better not try to correct them or ask them to lower their music, lest he/she be told where to get off.

There are signs indicating that radios should not be played loudly yet one often has to endure another passenger’s noise throughout the trip.

People often use obscene language and are raucous and disruptive to other passengers in the presence of the security officers who look at you as though to say, “Not me, I’m not getting involved.” I applaud the captains who decide to sail without the officers, because I’m sure they know about the misbehaviour which occurs in the presence of officers.

Since the sailings can continue without the security officers who see it fit to “work to rule,” maybe not as many of them are needed now.

CAROLYN CORRIAN Carnbee

He must bear in mind that even with the recent find of more gas, our natural resources are not going to last much longer. Not only that but with the falling prices of gas and oil worldwide, this country will find it difficult to maintain its financial stability if it continues to rely solely on the income from oil and gas. Poverty will in the meantime grow at an alarming rate, which in the end will lead to more crime and unrest.

It is now essential that the PM puts diversification at the top of his list to ensure the survival of this nation, as sooner rather than later our politicians will have to kiss goodbye to easy money flowing into the Treasury.

GA MARQUES via email

When there is lack of morality in the affairs of the Judiciary, do we expect moral judgment from those inclined to criminality?

IMAAM IQBAL HYDAL Felicity

“He is not responsible for nor has any control over the assignment of cases to his docket,” the statement, signed by Association president Douglas Mendes, SC, said yesterday. This follows allegations in a newspaper which questioned how Seepersad came to be assigned to three cases brought by lawyers closely associated with the United National Congress.

Mendes went on to note, as had the Judiciary on Thursday, that assignment of cases to judges is done through an electronic system administered by the High Court Civil Registry. “Neither can any inference be properly drawn from the alacrity with which he approaches his judicial functions or the efficiency with which he discharges them,” Mendes said.

Mendes also warned the media to be mindful that blindly repeating what is pedalled on social media, “serves only to legitimize unsubstantiated statements of persons who are not bound by a journalistic code of ethics.” Mendes made no specific reference, but on Wednesday the Trinidad Guardian published a front page story headlined ‘Judge Jitters’ which spoke of a, ‘dangerous cocktail of politics mixing with the judiciary’, and used social media posts in its story which raised questions and ridiculed Seepersad, for his case assignments although he was in Tobago, and his ability to pen a 22-page ruling within hours.

Only yesterday, the Trinidad Express, in a front page story, reported on a recently appointed judge’s social media postings, alleging some of his tweets on the Twitter platform were about women’s bodies and pornography.

Several tweets from High Court Judge Kevin Ramcharan’s Twitter account were published in the article.

Ramcharan was appointed in April along with former chief magistrate Marcia Ayers-Caesar and former magistrate Avason Quinlan-Williams.

SOCIAL MEDIA NOT CREDIBLE His tweets were said to be dated after his Supreme Court appointment on April 12. In his statement yesterday, Mendes said, “Tweets and social media posts may not be credible sources of news. Otherwise responsible members of the profession and society as a whole ought to also desist from posting, re-tweeting, sharing or circulating online messages, which unless substantiated, could only serve to undermine public confidence in the judiciary.” In his brief statement, Mendes called on the Registrar of the High Court to ‘take steps to ensure’ that any suspected attempts of ‘forum shopping’ were immediately brought to the attention of the Judiciary so that remedial action can be taken.

Allegations of ‘forum shopping’ – a practice adopted by litigants to get their cases heard in a particular court that is likely to provide a favourable judgment – were levelled against attorneys representing former UNC Senator Devant Maharaj.

These allegations were vehemently denied by Maharaj’s lead counsel Anand Ramlogan, SC, who said it was ‘preposterous and ridiculous’ to suggest there was anything untoward in the filing of the high court actions which challenged the implementation of the property tax and the composition of the JLSC.

“The possibility that an attorney may seek to manipulate the system by filing and re-filing proceedings until it is assigned to a judge of his liking is also beyond the particular judge’s control,” Mendes said.

Both of Maharaj’s cases were presided over by Seepersad, who granted injunctions in favour of the former politician. These orders have since been overturned by the appeal court. The coincidence of the same judge hearing the same claimant’s case over a matter of weeks have raised eyebrows, however, the procedure for the assignment of cases to judge has been clarified by the Judiciary in a statement on Thursday.

On May 25, six days after Justice Seepersad granted the first injunction in the property tax case, the attorney for the Chief State Solicitor Department, wrote to Supreme Court Registrar Jade Rodriguez questioning how the case came to be assigned to Seepersad.

The Registrar provided answers to the queries on June 5, the day before the appeal court heard the property tax appeals filed by the Commissioner of Valuations and the Attorney General.

In her response, Rodriguez said Maharaj’s judicial review application was first filed at the Registry of the Supreme Court sub-registry in San Fernando on May 18 at 3.18 pm – the same day Finance Minister Colm Imbert announced an extension to the deadline for citizens to file their document.

Maharaj’s claim was given a case number – CV2017-01837 – and was docketed to Justice Robin Mohammed. Rodriguez said the next day at 8.56 am, a notice of withdrawal was filed. Maharaj has said he gave these instructions to his attorneys since he needed to reconsider his case following the minister’s announcement of an extension.

CASE RE-FILED “From an administrative standpoint, it made better sense to discontinue and re-file the claim with the necessary changes,” Maharaj said. Rodriguez said a new ex-parte application was filed a few minutes earlier and this was given case number CV2017-01839 and docketed to Seepersad.

She explained that cases when filed in the civil court office are assigned at random to a judge selected by the computer automated docketing system. The Registrar added at the time of filing, no oral or written request was made by Maharaj’s attorneys but the attorneys asked for a hearing that day.

She provided an explanation on the process involved in filing a judicial review application. “The filing of an application for leave for judicial review is customarily treated with some urgency wherein the counter clerk enquires from the attorney’s clerk as to whether there is any urgency as to the date of hearing.

This information is then communicated by the counter clerk to the listing unit. “I am informed that this procedure was followed on the morning of the May 19, 2017, when CV20101839 was filed and the request was made orally by the attorneys’ clerk for the matter to be heard on the same day.

This information was communicated to the listing unit,” she said. In her eight page response, Rodriguez noted the judge’s Judicial Support Officer (JSO) was emailed with the notice and at approximately 9.37 am, the file was collected and the JSO Tracey Headley was instructed by Seepersad to arrange a court and to contact Maharaj’s attorneys.

This was done. Seepersad commenced hearing at 11.30 am at the San Fernando High Court, in open court. The order staying the implementation of the property tax was granted at 6 pm.

Rodriguez also said that attorneys for the Commissioner of Valuations were sent an email at 2.07 pm.

Told that attorneys for the State were informed by court staff that no Registrar was present when they made frantic efforts to ascertain whether an ex parte application was being heard, Rodriguez said although she and the assistant registrars were attending a seminar hosted by the Judicial Education Institute of the Judiciary, they were all available via telephone to deal with any urgent applications and were on call to deal with Maharaj’s matter.

She said at approximately 5.20 pm upon receiving notification that the case was still ongoing in the San Fernando Court, assistant Registrar Priscilla Rampersad proceeded to the San Fernando court and signed the judge’s order at 7 pm.

She also noted that the assistant Registrar did not place the penal clause on any of the five office copies of the judge’s order which were requested by the attorney.

Event organisers admitted on Thursday evening that the event had not been advertised well and that may have been one reason for the near-non-existent turnout.

But Deosaran told reporters, “It takes a lot of work to bring the public out, because you are fighting the public’s lack of confidence.

This has been done over and over so many times before, without any result. So the public might just say, ‘Why go another time?’” The meeting was scheduled to begin at about 6.30 pm. Officials intended to present their findings from examining police performance, the professional integrity of the police service and its level of accountability.

They hoped they would be able to use the people who attended the meeting as a sounding board to determine whether increases in technology and manpower would be a necessary and welcome improvement in the service. The manpower audit committee was also seeking feedback to see how satisfied the public was with the police’s performance, and how they believed the police could improve their performance.

Newsday also spoke with Ronald Frederick, the only member of the public at the meeting.

Frederick, a taxi driver and vice president of the St Ann’s Taxi Drivers’ Association, said he heard about the event through a mutual friend, but did not see any advertisement for it. He said he came to the meeting to ask for a higher police presence on the roads in St Ann’s to stymie the number of PH drivers working the route. However, none of that happened, because no one came.

In a statement to the House of Representative yesterday, Garcia said on May 31 he said two of the 14 special private schools registered with the Ministry of Education had received cheques for the 2016 to 2017 academic year.

After reports were published in the media that none of the schools were paid, Garcia said he was out of the country, but immediately called for a report on the matter.

“After an exhaustive investigation,” he said, “it has been ascertained that the payment vouchers had in fact been prepared and verified.” “The Comptroller of Accounts had previously issued instructions to all ministries that salary payments were to be given priority.” The officer who provided him with the information that the two schools had been paid, he said, “had overlooked this restriction and assumed that the cheques had been printed and issued.” In his haste, Garcia said, the officer had failed to double check the information.

He said he and the permanent secretary in the ministry interviewed the officer.

“I am persuaded that the misinformation was a genuine error, and was not a display of negligence or dereliction of duty.” The special private schools have been complaining of not being able to carry out their programmes for children with special needs because they have not received their subventions and they cannot, in some instances, afford to pay salaries and meet their overhead expenses.

These schools cater for more than 1,000 children with varying disabilities from age four.

These allegations have been vehemently denied by Maharaj’s lead counsel Anand Ramlogan, SC, who said it was ‘preposterous and ridiculous’ to suggest there was anything untoward in the filing of the high court actions which challenged the implementation of the property tax and the composition of the JLSC.

Both cases were presided over by Justice Frank Seepersad, who granted injunctions in favour of the former politician. These orders have since been overturned by the appeal court. The coincidence of the same judge hearing the same claimant’s case over a matter of weeks have raised eyebrows, however, the procedure for the assignment of cases to judge has been clarified by the Judiciary in a statement on Thursday.

On May 25, six days after Justice Seepersad granted the first injunction in the property tax case, the attorney for the Chief State Solicitor Department, wrote to Supreme Court Registrar Jade Rodriguez questioning how the case came to be assigned to Seepersad. The Registrar provided answers to the queries on June 5, the day before the appeal court heard the property tax appeals filed by the Commissioner of Valuations and the Attorney General.

In her response, Rodriguez said Maharaj’s judicial review application was first filed at the Registry of the Supreme Court sub-registry in San Fernando on May 18 at 3.18 pm – the same day Finance Minister Colm Imbert announced an extension to the deadline for citizens to file their document.

Maharaj’s claim was given a case number – CV2017-01837 – and was docketed to Justice Robin Mohammed. Rodriguez said the next day at 8.56 am, a notice of withdrawal was filed. Maharaj has said he gave these instructions to his attorneys since he needed to reconsider his case following the minister’s announcement of an extension.

CASE RE-FILED “From an administrative standpoint, it made better sense to discontinue and re-file the claim with the necessary changes,” Maharaj said.

Rodriguez said a new ex-parte application was filed a few minutes earlier and this was given case number CV2017- 01839 and docketed to Seepersad.

She explained that cases when filed in the civil court office are assigned at random to a judge selected by the computer automated docketing system. The Registrar added at the time of filing, no oral or written request was made by Maharaj’s attorneys but the attorneys asked for a hearing that day.

She provided an explanation on the process involved in filing a judicial review application.

“The filing of an application for leave for judicial review is customarily treated with some urgency wherein the counter clerk enquires from the attorney’s clerk as to whether there is any urgency as to the date of hearing.

This information is then communicated by the counter clerk to the listing unit. “I am informed that this procedure was followed on the morning of the May 19, 2017, when CV20101839 was filed and the request was made orally by the attorneys’ clerk for the matter to be heard on the same day.

This information was communicated to the listing unit,” she said.

In her eight page response, Rodriguez noted the judge’s Judicial Support Officer (JSO) was emailed with the notice and at approximately 9.37 am, the file was collected and the JSO Tracey Headley was instructed by Seepersad to arrange a court and to contact Maharaj’s attorneys.

This was done. Seepersad commenced hearing at 11.30 am at the San Fernando High Court, in open court.

The order staying the implementation of the property tax was granted at 6 pm.

Rodriguez also said that attorneys for the Commissioner of Valuations were sent an email at 2.07 pm.

Told that attorneys for the State were informed by court staff that no Registrar was present when they made frantic efforts to ascertain whether an ex parte application was being heard, Rodriguez said although she and the assistant registrars were attending a seminar hosted by the Judicial Education Institute of the Judiciary, they were all available via telephone to deal with any urgent applications and were on call to deal with Maharaj’s matter.

She said at approximately 5.20 pm upon receiving notification that the case was still ongoing in the San Fernando Court, assistant Registrar Priscilla Rampersad proceeded to the San Fernando court and signed the judge’s order at 7 pm. She also noted that the assistant Registrar did not place the penal clause on any of the five office copies of the judge’s order which were requested by the attorney.

SPECTRE OF ‘UNC JUDGES’ In a statement, Maharaj said it had come to his attention that there was a politically motivated attack on Seepersad in light of his ruling in the property tax case and the composition if the JLSC.

He cited previous perceived attacks by the People’s National Movement which criticised certain judges in high profile cases and were labelled ‘UNC judges.’ “My case against the JLSC was filed and I was advised by the court registry that it was assigned to Seepersad. I was told that this was a random assignment. What was I supposed to do? It should be noted as well that the first judge who was assigned to the property tax case was Justice Robin Mohammed who was the trial judge in Mr Ramlogan’s defamation case against Mr Jack Warner and awarded $1 million to Mr Ramlogan,” he said.

He lamented that many of them had been festering in jail unjustly simply because they could either not afford the bail allotted to them or because they could not afford legal counsel.

No one would disagree that prolonged imprisonment for such reasons is manifestly unjust.

It exposed an insidious type of inequity that weighed heavily against the poor and vulnerable.

When I reflect on the archbishop’s deliberate silence today, on the prospect that 53 prisoners may have to suffer the anguish of having their cases restarted de novo, I wonder privately how this affront to justice has not reignited the archbishop’s fervour. Some of these unfortunate souls have waited as long as eight years for their matter to be heard in court.

Just as their issues began to wax warm, the Judiciary has seen it fit to douse the rekindling of their hope with cold water.

As far as I am aware, Archbishop Harris has neither offered comment nor suggested a solution to this act of apparent judicial incompetence. That said, I preemptively offer my apologies to the prelate if I am in error.

One cannot fault a man for his silence since his thoughts remain his. On the other hand, a radio host has used his platform to suggest that the sentiment that Chief Justice Ivor Archie should demit office took root in racism.

The leader of the Anglican Church has also privately opined that citizens must not be too eager for the authors of this injustice against those in captivity to be fired, since those in error were people of “impeccable character.” The radio host suggested that the people who continue to demand Archie’s immediate resignation allegedly harbour hidden “racial” motives.

Of course if one were to isolate the Chief Justice and treat the relevant issues as though they pertained to him alone, then he stands out as Trinidadian with African roots.

If one looks at the entire picture, however, then one would discern that the same call is being directed at all the members of the present JLSC. Before the advent of E Koylass, that body comprised two men with Caucasian lineage and a woman who appears to be of mixed descent.

So I would like to ask the radio host to define the type of “racism” that he is seeing. Is it anti-African, anti-mixed race or anti-Caucasian? Why “isolate” Archie from the rest? He is the head of an inept organisation.

Further to this, I heard the radio host suggest that “they want an Indian Chief Justice.” I do not know who “they” might be. He also lamented the fact that even Afro-Trinidadians in the Law Association called for Archie’s resignation.

I would have thought that level- headed men judged the actions of their fellow men by considerations that extended beyond simply the way they look. It is a tragedy that this level of ignorant bigotry exists in present-day Trinidad.

STEVE SMITH via email

Hughes made the statement while delivering the first lecture, Guyana: New Frontier, on the opening day of the Second Oil and Gas Law Conference held by the Faculty of Law of the St Augustine Campus of the University of the West Indies at the Hilton Trinidad, St Ann’s, on Thursday.

He said the proposal followed the oil and gas discovery in Guyana’s Liza 1 field, 120 miles offshore in May 2015, when Exxon discovered 800 million-1.4 billion barrels of oil and gas, which he said were staggering numbers for a country which had no history of oil exploration and a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at the time of only US$3.6 billion. He said the discovery was one of the richest oil and gas finds in the world for decades.

The two-day conference was sponsored by BPTT, Shell and eog resources and closed yesterday. Day one also featured a panel discussion on local content in the energy sector, in which Dr Ekpen Omonbude, economic adviser (natural resources) at the Oceans and Natural Resources Advisory Division of the Commonwealth Secretariat, said among other things that in building local content, clarity was important, because if something meant different things to different people, there was a good chance that it would be done differently.

He said the advantage could be an overall improvement in quality and systematic valuation, though the downside was that the country could become too risk-averse and the policies end up focusing on the “small stuff.” He said policies also needed to be adaptable. He urged the early integration of procurement strategies of companies into the planning of countries, saying that the companies always knew before the countries what the skills were, and the country could then try to fit them into their national development plans.

Anthony Paul, chairman of the Local Content Committee, traced the development of local content in Trinidad and Tobago. He referred to the late Lloyd Best’s theory of the plantation economy, in which, he said, locals are only trained to build and operate an asset, but the skills to develop the business plan and source financing are kept at the head office of the international companies which own those facilities.

However, he said during this country’s gas development phase it was forced to build those skills because it had to get its own ships and management contracts and this was learnt during the development of the Point Lisas Industrial Estate.

We appear to be arriving at the point of seeking Privy Council permission to even breathe in TT . Is it that if and whenever the Opposition UNC does not get judgments in its favour it will seek to be facilitated by to Privy Council? Our senior legal fraternity appears transfixed by its own importance and is not entirely immune from “he say, she say, they say and them say.” There is a creeping feeling of self-inflicted disrespect. The Remand Yard is full of people waiting for their cases to be heard and the legal fraternity is in paralysis over right and wrong .

If indeed in politics, love and war image is everything, then the Opposition UNC must surely believe that God is a lawyer and that is a flawed image. Who will step in and save the UNC in 2020? God or the Privy Council? I must admit that when Reginald Dumas won his case for private citizens to seek redress at the Privy Council level for constitutional concerns, I did not feel joy .

The feeling was, “What has this man done?” He may have inadvertently opened the way for frivolous and vexatious appeals that will leave us permanently politically paralysed .

Not every victory is a victory of uncomplicated good .

LYNETTE JOSEPH Diego Martin