Lawyers fail to agree on CJ search

WITH a seemingly split judiciary and legal profession, it was no surprise yesterday that lawyers could not agree on a resolution regarding the May 19 search of the chambers of Chief Justice Sat Sharma.

After a two-hour special meeting at the Hall of Justice, lawyers could not agree on what should be done after the police executed a warrant on Sharma’s chambers and removed documents.

The meeting was called by the Council of the Law Association to consider and discuss issues surrounding the search of Sharma’s chambers, implications of undermining the public’s confidence in the administration of justice and to take such decisions at the meeting as may be deemed appropriate.

But it was evident from early that no agreement would be reached. The meeting started at 3.30 pm and was chaired by Hendrickson Seunath SC, vice president of the association. Russell Martineau SC, the association’s president, absented himself from the meeting as he is one of the lawyers representing the Chief Justice.

Lawyers began leaving the Hall of Justice as early as 4.30 pm with comments such as “nothing will be achieved” and “they wasting people time.” At 5.40 pm, there were lawyers aplenty as they began leaving the Hall of Justice.

When Seunath exited the building and was asked by the media about the meeting, he said the association will consider whether a statement will be issued on the meeting. He said about 150 lawyers attended the meeting and “lots of things were discussed. It is just that no resolution was passed.”

Seunath admitted that the membership discussed the issuance of a warrant to search the chambers of the Chief Justice and the legal ramifications of such action.

Pressed by the media, Seunath admitted that one member called for a Commission of Inquiry into the search of Sharma’s chambers while he was attending a judicial conference in the Czech Republic. Newsday learnt that a vote was put on the issue with 39 agreeing and 111 disagreeing.