Judges upset with Jamadar...

AT least two high court judges have distanced themselves from a statement by acting Chief Justice Peter Jamadar who called for restraint in public criticism of the judiciary this Carnival.

On Sunday, Jamadar said, “Unwarranted, crass and demeaning criticisms are not likely to be justifiable in either the social or the public interest and may more likely undermine them both.”

He was speaking about an ole-mas presentation by a group of men on the steps of the Hall of Justice, Port of Spain, on Friday.

The group of about ten men wore black garbage bags, lined in red and white, to look like judges’ robes and their messages highlighted some of the controversy currently plaguing the judiciary.

In his own statement, Justice Frank Seepersad said he unreservedly disassociated himself from the judiciary’s warning.

“As a judicial officer, I have never felt that my office shields me from measured critique, commentary which is not defamatory or from being held to account for my actions both in and out of court.

“Respect for high office cannot be demanded, it has to be earned.

“To engender same, the office holder must conduct himself / herself in such a manner which signals that he/she respects and acknowledges the import of the office, treasures the privilege to serve and conscientiously strives to behave in a manner which emulates and adopts the highest standards of honesty and integrity,” Seepersad said.

His statement was “endorsed without reservation” by Justice Carol Gobin.

Seepersad said as judicial officers, judges had a “a heightened obligation to ensure that we conduct our professional and personal lives in a manner which is devoid of deviance, dysfunction and duplicity.”

“Citizens deserve to have judges who are above reproach and judicial officers must be cognisant that it will be extremely difficult for members of the public to respect the judgements delivered, if they are unable to respect the individuals who delivered them.”

He said from what was posted on social media and reported on by the mainstream media, the ole-mas depictions “did not appear to be unfair ,unreasonable and or disproportionate especially when regard is had to the issues which have been traversed before the courts, the report prepared by the Law Association ,the pending matters still to be adjudicated upon and the preponderance of information in the public domain.”

“The depictions also appeared to be reflective of the picong, double entendre and humour which is synonymous with ole-mas.

The right and ability to engage in social commentary is indicative of a healthy democracy and any attempt to subvert freedom of expression premised upon any misguided perception of untouchability, entitlement or privilege, has to be strongly condemned,” Seepersad said.