Attorney on 'silk' debate: 'I will not be silenced'

ATTORNEY Darrell Allahar remains adamant he will not back down on questioning the process for the appointment of senior counsel.

He was responding to a statement by Criminal Bar Association president Israel Khan, SC, on June 26.

In his statement on June 25, Khan defended Law Association president Lynette Seebaran-Suite, who on June 24 spoke of LATT’s involvement, and hers as president, in the 2024 selection process in an e-mail to members.

Khan said while he agreed with his colleagues in the legal profession on the need to reform the appointment process for senior counsel, he was disappointed that the “frustration with the process was wrongly and unjustifiably directed to the president of LATT.”

However, Allahar said what had been revealed so far spoke for itself.

“There is obviously a high degree of mistrust of every stage of the whole process. I am entitled to ask questions. If I didn’t, we would have never been told what happened at the LATT stage. Many questions remain unanswered.

“Some may be unhappy with persons asking questions. They are as entitled to their views as I am.”

Allahar wrote to the LATT president on June 20, seeking answers and posing his own questions to Seebaran-Suite.

He also said Seebaran-Suite’s explanation of the process was “as murky as Manzanilla water in the rainy season.”

Allahar added, “What was not disclosed is as curious as what was shared with us.”

His questions were: If the AG’s letter to the President of LATT merely enclosed a list, was it that recommendations were made on names alone without resumes or application forms?

“How did the LATT Executive choose the senior counsel they wished to consult?

“How many 'silks' were available and were consulted?

“Why would those silks wish to make their picks anonymously?

“Why was the executive of LATT involved in the selection committee?

“Were those executive members senior counsel as well?

“How did the committee decide on the number of names to carry forward to the AG?

“What method was adopted by the president of LATT when she finalised the list of names that were carried to the AG?”

Allahar said he could not fathom how courtesy could justify the LATT president’s participation in the silk process when the membership, by resolution in 2015, accepted the recommendation of the “Silk Report” which called for sweeping changes in the appointment process for senior counsel.

“The LATT process appears to be as arbitrary and opaque as the system the LATT wants to make more transparent!

“I suppose the membership would ultimately be the ones to say how they feel about what was done in their name and on their behalf.

“I, for one, am extremely surprised and disappointed. They should have informed the membership of their intention to participate upfront and provided this information before.

“I suppose they thought forgiveness would be easier to obtain than permission.”