At least one attorney who represented the Prime Minister has commented on the outcome of the Law Association’s legal challenge of Dr Rowley’s refusal to invoke impeachment proceedings against the Chief Justice.
Speaking after the court’s ruling on Wednesday, Justin Phelps said, “The court has scrutinised the Prime Minister’s conduct and has found that he acted “reasonably” and “logically” in the discharge of his duties under the Constitution.”
Phelps added, “Notwithstanding this, the court has said that a small part of the decision should be reconsidered in more direct language so as to be free of any criticism.”
He said the case raised a broader issue that the years of allegations against the CJ had resolved themselves into a single suggestion that it was wrong for him to have recommended needy persons for public housing.
“Even if anything was wrong with that, the court has said that it cannot rise to the level of conduct envisaged by Section 137.
“That point should be given wide visibility because for years, confidence in the institution has been eroded and the push should now be to rebuild that confidence. It is a dangerous thing when people start to doubt the legitimacy of the courts and this may have been the unintended result of the events of the past years. I think all concerned probably owe a duty to the institution to bring a quick end to this episode.
“There's simply no case for impeachment and the quicker the public is made aware of that the better,” he added.
Phelps said his comments were made as one of the prime minister's attorneys and a member of the legal profession.
Attorneys for Archie said their client would be saying “absolutely nothing” on the court’s decision.