Playing word games with rights

ABDUCTION or no abduction? It seems more attention has been paid, by authorities in both Barbados and TT, to the semantics of this word than to giving us the full facts relating to the shocking case of Brent Thomas.

Even as Barbadian Attorney General Dale Marshall, KC, on Tuesday conceded police in his country had “fallen somewhat short of applicable legal norms” in their removal of Mr Thomas from a hotel room for the purpose of extradition, he nonetheless took issue with language used by the TT High Court last month.

“They rendered that assistance without any mental element of criminality that would be associated with an abduction,” Mr Marshall said.

A similar position was taken by this country’s Prime Minister last week, when he took aim at the use of the same word by the judge in the case, Justice Devindra Rampersad, saying the word implied “criminal conduct for benefit.”

On Wednesday, Attorney General Reginald Armour, SC, too, concurred in a statement in Parliament in which he apologised to Barbados police, even as the arms of law enforcement in both countries have effectively admitted doing something wrong in circumventing normal extradition processes.

If the judge’s use of the word was wrong, then it is a good thing he deployed it: for it seems this case would not have come to the attention of any of these officials who are today feigning ignorance of a matter that should have come to their desks long before now.

The ordinary meaning of the word abduction includes the unlawful removal of an individual.

The abduction of Mr Thomas was astonishing, but the reaction of officials in both countries since this case rose to prominence has been equally so.

Far from suggesting concern or dismay that the rights of a Caricom citizen have been encroached, politicians have hidden behind the fig leaf of semantics. That is telling.

Additionally, Dr Rowley, when questioned about a pre-booked “vacation” in Barbados he had over the weekend, said last week he had no intention of meeting Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley, as there was as yet nothing which, in his view, merited his “insertion” into this issue.

By Tuesday, however, the TT PM was telling a different tale, saying he did, in fact, meet with Ms Mottley, who happens to be in an identical position to himself.

“Our departments are looking at it,” he said of this matter, itself the culmination of a months-long case which featured myriad representations from state lawyers.

Either what has happened here was a remarkable breakdown of oversight by the executive branch of government on sensitive extradition matters over a prolonged period of time, or something far worse.

Both possibilities are frightening.