Bernard rebukes Law Association

Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry into the Piarco Airport Project, retired Chief Justice Clinton Bernard, yesterday re-buked the Law Association of TT for its uninformed and “belligerent approach” to the Inquiry.

He said the Association has made several statements in the media without first apprising itself with the correspondence passing bet-ween the Inquiry and persons interested in its proceedings. Bernard’s latest defence of the Inquiry which entered its 140-day yesterday follows the publication by Newsday yesterday of the contents of a letter (dated April 28) sent by the Council of the Law Association to the Commission. In it the Council cautioned against following the advice of Lord Justice Scott of the Privy Council with respect to procedures at public inquiries. The Council also enclosed an article by Lord Howe of Aberavon which criticised the Scott Inquiry’s refusal to afford persons appearing to have legal representation.

Bernard said it was “utterly misleading” to the uninformed reader for the Association to advise caution as it must be aware the Scott Inquiry was conducted within parameters of a statute different from this country’s Commission of Inquiry Act. At yesterday’s sitting Bernard read into the record the Commis-sion’s response dated Tuesday that was hand delivered to Hendrickson Seunath SC, the Honorary Secretary of the Law Association yesterday morning. Bernard reminded Seunath that the Commission, “unlike” the Scott Inquiry, has given all persons appearing the right to be legally represented. As a result, he said Howe’s article bore no relevance to the present Inquiry. Bernard said the Council has on previous occasions publicly criticised the Inquiry for identifying persons interested in its Terms of Reference as “subjects” while now “going on record” in connection with Howe’s article on the issue of legal representation.

He reminded that the “subjects” were the “very people” entitled to representation under the Commis-sion of Inquiry Act Chapter 19:01. It states: “Any person whose conduct is subject of the inquiry under this Act or who is in any way implicated or concerned in the matter under inquiry, shall be entitled to be represented by counsel at the whole of the inquiry, and any other person who may consider it desirable that he should be so represented may, by leave of the Commissioners, be represented in the same manner.” Bernard said the Tribunal has exercised its discretionary powers under the Act regarding legal representation and there was no exclusion of lawyers. “Had your Council inquired, it would have become aware that not a single request for legal representation has been refused, and on occasion such representation has been insisted upon by the Tribunal.”  Sittings have also been adjourned to accommodate persons whose law-yers were not available. Bernard said the Tribunal is sure that having studied Howe’s Article and its opening statement and procedural rules, the Association would conclude that words of caution are unnecessary. “As a responsible body” he said the Association should withdraw them. He welcomed any other comments it wished to make about the procedures adopted at the Inquiry.