DANGEROUS MOVE

ATTORNEY General Faris Al-Rawi yesterday said the Privy Council is an appropriate entity to settle the matter involving lawyers who voted for the Law Association to go ahead with judicial review proceedings against the Prime Minister, challenging his refusal to start impeachment proceedings against Chief Justice Ivor Archie.

He cautioned it would “be dangerous” for the challenge to be decided by the local high court.

Interviewed by TV6 News, Al-Rawi was asked if the high court can direct the Prime Minister, and the Government, to change the decision to not impeach Archie.

“This is going to be quite an interesting issue...obviously the highest court of the land would have to be called upon to settle this issue. It will be very dangerous to allow this issue to be decided simply by a high court decision.,” he replied. “Obviously either party will have the right to appeal any judicial review decision, whether to be granted or not, and certainly the Privy Council is an appropriate entity to settle the law once and for all.

“It is important in democracies such as ours that there is clarity on the law on certain issues. This is definitely one of those issues, at least in my mind, not speaking to the Prime Minister, but in my mind as Attorney General there is a definite need for clarity on this issue and certainly one will want to have the benefit of the Privy Council speaking on this matter.”

On Friday, lawyers met at three locations – the auditorium of the Government Campus Plaza in Port of Spain, the rooftop of a law firm in San Fernando and at the Triangle Building in Tobago – to vote on the sole issue of whether to start judicial review proceedings against the prime minister.

Sources said there were 235 members in attendance, and of the 230 ballots cast, 163 voted in favour of legal action being taken against Dr Rowley.

There were 66 votes against proceeding with a judicial review claim, while there was one spoilt vote.

Al-Rawi said despite a small turnout of lawyers, they can cause a result saying, “It is obviously open to the Law Association to seek to have a review. It is a decision of its membership, a very small turnout, a very low turnout, but nonetheless one that is quite capable of causing a result and it will take its course.”

Before Friday’s vote, the association’s president, Douglas Mendes, SC, made a personal plea to attorneys in a statement, reminding them of the importance of the topic.

Mendes, in a statement to members, told them, “I need say very little to impress upon you the importance of this decision, one way or the other.

“Apart from the significant commitment in human and financial resources which this would entail, important rule of law and accountability issues are at stake.

“It is accordingly crucial that there is a large turnout of the membership so that your council may be confident that the voice of the entire membership is heard, one way or the other,” he said, as he urged members to turn out in their numbers.

In July, Dr Rowley said he did not initiate impeachment proceedings against the Chief Justice after receiving legal advice, which said he should not take the association’s advice to invoke section 137 proceedings to have Archie impeached for allegations against him.

He said the advice guided him on deciding there were insufficient grounds to warrant him to make a representation to the President for Archie’s removal and for a tribunal to be set up to investigate the series of allegations which arose in 2017.

The Prime Minister, in refusing the association’s request to trigger section 137, addressed each of the complaints against Archie: judicial security arrangements; alleged WhatsApp communication with the CJ’s alleged friend Dillian Johnson on judges’ security; the issue of a police escort for Justice Frank Seepersad; and the Housing Development Corporation (HDC) complaints.

The association made its request in December after members voted to send its investigative report to Rowley. This followed the ruling of the Privy Council which dismissed the Chief Justice’s complaints of the association’s investigations of him.