Justice Seepersad upset

A police source confirmed yesterday that Justice Seepersad recently wrote to Commissioner Williams expressing concern about his personal security and that of his family. The judge, source said, was supposed to have interacted with CJ Archie yesterday on the issue of the online comments.

Following delivery of judgments on the Property Tax and the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (JLSC) lawsuits, Facebook was rife with comments, with several suggesting Justice Seepersad picks and chooses anti-government lawsuits to adjudicate on. Over the past two weeks, Justice Seepersad presided over former UNC Senator Devant Maharaj’s challenge of Government’s imposition of the property tax.

In this case, Justice Seepersad wrote a 28-page judgment. In the JLSC lawsuit, which sought the court’s order to stop the swearing in of two judges, Justice Seepersad delivered a 22-page written judgment. In both cases, Justice Seepersad ruled in favour of the lawsuits. However, his rulings were subsequently overturned on appeal at the Court of Appeal.

Yesterday, Newsday obtained from the Registry of the Supreme Court, a copy of the Civil Procedure Rules. Under the rubric: Docket System, the Rules explained how cases are assigned to judges. The Rules state under, ‘Individual Assignment System’ that: “The Court shall operate under an individual assignment system to assure continuous and close judicial supervision of every case and the even distribution of cases among judges.

“Each civil, public law and matrimonial proceedings except as otherwise provided, shall be randomly assigned to a judge. The system shall be administrated by the calendering and case management committee prescribed in the directions in such a manner, that all judges except the chief justice, shall be assigned substantial and equal share and kind of the work of the court.” The rule, a legal source clarified, makes it abundantly clear that judges do not pick and chose cases to determine.