Citizens must be able to challenge state

The PNM Government’s introduction of the Judicial Review Amendment Bill 2005 strongly suggests that the ruling party is no friend to democracy. It also suggests that the Government has its legislative priorities skewed. This Bill, whose only purpose is to prevent the courts from ruling on government discrimination and incompetence, has been introduced in a context when far more important Acts are still to see the light of day. First among that list is the DNA Act, which was passed four years ago but which has not yet been proclaimed. This Act is seen as a key component of modernising the nation’s crime-fighting techniques. But it has been given an added impetus because of its relevance to the Akiel Chambers murder, a case where DNA testing would almost surely have nailed Akiel’s abuser and probable killer.

Similarly, the Children Authority Act, which will help protect at-risk children from abuse, has not been proclaimed. Neither has the Occupational Health and Safety Act, although for this year there have already been four industry-related deaths. All this could be dismissed as mere incompetence, but a more cynical interpretation of the Government’s foot-dragging is that they do not wish to offend powerful interests in the society. And this indefensible Judicial Review Amendment Bill could lend credence to such an interpretation. After all, the legislation is specifically designed to prevent a citizen from challenging Government decisions on matters in which the said citizen has no vested interest. Without the slightest shame — nor, it seems, sense — the Bill repeals the provision “where the relief sought would be in the public interest”.

So what the Government is in effect saying is that having a social conscience is wrong. Under this proposed legislation, you can go to the court only if you are directly affected by a decision taken by the Government. Were this Bill already law, then, Fishermen and Friends of the Sea could not bring cases in environmental matters; the Maha Sabha could not challenge the appointment of literature professor Selwyn Cudjoe to the Board of the Central Bank; and the Opposition could not prove in court that the Integrity Commission made a wrong decision in not paying their MPs during the 18-18 deadlock. Ironically, this Bill could also inflict a critical wound to the PNM’s much-vaunted Vision 2020 project.

Becoming a developed nation requires many things, but a key factor is a sense of responsibility among a country’s elites for those citizens who are less privileged or powerful. In the modern world, public interest legislation is an important component in creating such a compact between elites and masses. Just as importantly, public interest legislation helps contain the power of the State. This is fundamental to effective democracy. If there is one lesson that history teaches, it is that untrammelled State power leads to corruption, inefficiency and oppression.

The Marlene Coudray case, the Devant Maharaj case, and other challenges to the Public Service and the Prime Minister have exposed bias and bad practice. This surely helps create a better society for all citizens, as well as better government. Apparently, though, the Patrick Manning administration does not see it that way. Their position seems to be that the business of the government is not the business of citizens. We hope, however, that the Government will prove our opinion wrong by withdrawing this egregious Bill.