JAL 20 December 2014 Nice Radio’s Callaloo presents, Just Another Look. Just Another Look is an innovative, exciting, albeit decidedly provocative and controversial, socio-political analysis of issues of a local, regional and international nature. Just Another Look is heard only on Nice Radio on Saturdays at 6.00pm, with repeat broadcasts at 9.00pm on Sundays. Remember too that you can also catch us on the worldwide web, niceradio.info. You can check our JAL blog - vincyview I am, of course, Keith Joseph Introduction Today is Saturday 20 December 2014. Welcome, welcome, welcome to another edition of Just Another Look. The sheep is alive… it never died and the incident never existed… Bring me the dead sheep!!! The reason we ask for the dead sheep is clear. There was none. Some people decided to create some mischief and so they did. In this Christmas season we give these people a chance to redeem themselves and speak the truth. The unabridged version of the truth. Of course that is not in their political DNA so we can expect no such good fortune in terms of a withdrawal of the initial rumour urgently crafted in song to appease the minions. Elections Watch? The bell. Who is begging for it to be rung? Why? Why not? Crime out of control For the past several years Just Another Look has insisted that the ruling ULP regime has been unable to fulfil one of the biggest boasts of its 2001 elections manifesto. The ULP manifesto of 2001 claimed that a ULP government would wage an incessant war on crime and the causes of crime. On reflection, it now seems clear that it is easy to talk and make vainglorious boasts of what is possible, when one is out of Parliament and has absolutely no idea of the reality of being in government. Gonsalves was a theoretical politician at best, before 2001. What we saw may well have been the rantings and ravings of a young man anxious to rise to the top of the political ladder but with no real practical political experience to support his ambitions. Some may well suggest that Gonsalves always had political ambitions. The elections of 2001 gave Gonsalves the opportunity he so badly needed or perhaps we should say wanted. Unfortunately for Gonsalves he may well have gotten much more than he bargained for. While in Opposition Vincent Beache it was who chided the NDP for its inability to redress the situation of crime and the causes of crime. Some may recall Vincent Beache chiding the then Commissioner of Police, Randolph Toussaint and the NDP administration for being unable to address the drug problem. At once reference was made indicating that the drug problem was virtually just around the corner and yet it could not be harnessed. The elections campaign of 2000 and 2001 made much of the crime situation in St Vincent and the Grenadines. The way that the ULP painted the crime situation in St Vincent and the Grenadines one would have thought that we were ranked amongst the worst in the world. But that is how the ULP saw itself while in Opposition. It painted a rather gloomy picture of the state of crime in St Vincent and the Grenadines because it saw that as its role in Opposition. Interestingly, at the time the ULP did not seem to care about the image of St Vincent and the Grenadines that their stance portrayed to the rest of the world. When they blocked the road, did they care about the image of the country? However, today, when the Opposition speaks of people’s inability to purchase chicken back and neck, suddenly the ruling regime is concerned about how that sounds in the international community. It did not seem to matter to the ruling regime that it is the truth that is being spoken. Their concern is about their own image, not truth. So it is with crime and the causes of crime. The ruling ULP regime is so very concerned about its own image that it is fearful of coming to terms with its colossal failure in the fight against crime and the causes of crime. Indeed, some may well want to suggest that under the ULP administration we seem to have a different definition of crime. What is a crime? If the ULP administration has been able to boast of the Police doing relatively well with crime then we must admit that crime has been re-defined. It is just that Vincentians have not been told what, under the ULP, constitutes a crime. The ULP seems to be bursting at the seams even as it prepares for the next general election. Things are just unravelling all around them. The Comrade may well be at his wits end trying to ascertain why it is everything seems to be going wrong and under his watch. Some time ago we were told that the many years of legal practice allowed for an understanding of the inner workings of the criminal mind. However, unfortunately for St Vincent and the Grenadines, it does appear that the knowledge of the inner workings of the criminal mind does not so readily apply to crime and the war being waged on crime in St Vincent and the Grenadines. As Prime Minister and Minister of National Security the Comrade has been unable to stem the tide of criminal activity in St Vincent and the Grenadines. This must be a fact that keeps the Comrade awake at nights. The promised war against crime and the causes of crime has been lost from the very beginning and the ULP administration has only a decidedly poor report card in this regard. For yet another year, the third since the ULP came office, this country has set a new national record for the number of murders committed in a single year. Some may well remember that one year it had gotten so bad in terms of the number of murders being committed here that the Prime Minister had a Christmas Wish – for there to be no more murders at that time. Of course, Santa seemingly ignored the Christmas wish of the Prime Minister. It must be disheartening for the Comrade that as a Prime Minister he had to oversee at once the collapse of his administration and the record increase in the number of murders committed here in a single year. Could you imagine what would have been the public stance of the ULP had the shoes been on the other foot and the record number of murders were committed under an NDP government? Would we not have been hearing of it on every media source and on one platform after another to say nothing of the Comrade’s own Press Huggings? Unfortunately the NDP has not been as proficient with the use of all available media sources as the ULP would have been. Vincentians must however be told the truth and it appears that the crime rate in the country is untenable at this stage. Vincentians must ask themselves as to what extent can it be said that the national security of this country has become something of a political patsy? To what extent has the Police Service been politicised? Vincentians can readily compare the performance of former Commissioner of Police, William Harry, when he acted briefly under the NDP administration, to his performance as Commissioner when he was formally installed under the ULP administration. Some may still be wondering what became of the William Harry they once knew. Some may even suggest that Harry might still be asking himself the same question. What was the overall performance of Harry and the Police under his watch in respect of crime and the war that was supposed to be waged on crime and its causes? Then what of the appointment of Keith Miller as Commissioner of Police? Were lofty words not heaped on Miller at the time of his appointment? Compare what was said of Miller at the time of his appointment as compared to his departure? What was Miller’s performance record on the war against crime and the causes of crime? For certain Vincentians would forever remember Miller as the Vincentian Commissioner of Police who sent money by Western Union to a Precious Lady somewhere in Africa to attend a Conference that did not exist. He sent three instalments of money by Western Union before it dawned on him that he may have been caught up in a grand scheme. When Miller eventually sought the advice of the US he may well have been made to understand that he was caught up in one of the oldest schemes in the world. Who authorised the money that Miller had sent to the lady we choose to call, Madame Precious? Who repaid the money that Miller spent to attend a conference that never existed? Does anyone care whether or not Miller paid back the money? What then was Miller’s contribution to the war that the ULP promised to wage on crime and its causes? We are at a stage in St Vincent and the Grenadines where the average day is replete with robberies of one sort or another. Breaking and entering has become the norm to such an extent that people are not bothering to inform the Police. One report after another of breaking and entering has made no difference and so people have given up reporting this crime. One has only to spend on hour on any given day at the Family Court to understand the extent of social degradation that has taken place in this country over the past several years. It begs the question, where are the role models? Unfortunately some of our leaders have made it to the national news in circumstances that are not in any way exemplary and may well be deemed as adding to the social malaise which has thus far captured us and holds us to ransom. The demise of Glen Jackson remains one of the highlights of the ULP’s war on crime and the causes of crime. Jackson’s wife insisted that she did not wish to experience scapegoat justice in the matter involving the gruesome death of her husband. The ULP may well be ashamed to let the nation know what kind of justice she eventually got. The amazing reality is that Glen Jackson was one of their own. He was considered one of their most influential opinion shapers. If that is the justice Glen Jackson received what can we expect of anyone else? St Vincent and the Grenadines is now very cynical about justice and the most recent incident, the death of Edgar Cruickshank and those who were injured at the same incident makes it all the more difficult for Vincentians. Indeed the matter is before the court but Vincentians remain cynical. Interestingly, all sorts of things have come into play already. The News newspaper dated Friday 12 December 2014 stated in a Page 2 article… Even before preliminary investigations were done and despite comments by witnesses to the contrary, Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s Office, senator Julian Francis, has stated publicly that the incident where a motorcar ploughed through a crowd during the opposition New Democratic Party (NDP) meeting at Clare Valley last weekend was a “genuine accident.” The News newspaper article also stated… Francis’ pre-empting of a report on the investigation into the incident which left one man dead and about 10 injured, was the oblique opposite, or in stark contrast, to a position taken by Prime Minister Dr Ralph Gonsalves some months ago in relation to allowing investigations of inappropriate actions to take place. The News was referring to Gonsalves’ appeal when the matter of former High Court Registrar, Tamara Gibson-Marks, was in the air, to let the institutions of state do their work before coming to conclusions or making judgements. On Friday last, 19 December 2014, the News newspaper on its front page and inside back page made reference to the Police News Release on the matter of the death of Edgar Cruickshank. The startling headline to the article on the front page reads…Police Report uses Driver’s account as fact! Even as the matter is before the court Vincentians are being called upon to make sense of all of this and to follow closely the administration of justice in the country. On page 47 the article states… Asked if a report is a finding of facts and/or the conclusion or opinion of a professional or expert, John replied, A report is as a result of investigations.” The newspaper also stated that the Police news release indicated that the vehicle’s engine had closed off and “continued travelling downhill for over 500ft”. When asked about this John responded that it was correct to say the road was all downhill. The News newspaper however visited the area and seemed unable to find evidence to support what was stated. The court will ultimately determine where justice would fall in this matter. Vincentians remain concerned and extremely cynical and tentative. So we are boasting of a Police Exhibition regarding Crime Prevention in St Vincent and the Grenadines but we seem unable to put a clamp on the murders taking place in this country. It is most interesting to note the seeming Police acceptance that the killing of persons associated with a cocaine haul as a fait acompli. It seems as though there was a sort of tacit acceptance that the persons associated with the haul would be killed and that the Police could do nothing about it other than collect the dead bodies. What does this tell us about the war that the ULP is waging on crime and the causes of crime? But should we be surprised? How many Vincentians knew of the concept of nolly prosequi before the ULP came to office? How many matters brought before the courts in St Vincent and the Grenadines ended up being nolly prosequied prior to the advent of the ULP government? Vincentians now know of the concept of nolly prosequi and understand why it has been used and in what circumstances. It is amazing. It is unbelievable. Vincentians are only now beginning to realise that the concept of nolly prosequi may well be one of the cornerstones of the ULP government’s war on crime and the causes of crime. Indeed we can very well refer to the ULP administration as the nolly prosequi administration. The one is as good as the other. Ask yourselves just how comfortable you are as an average Vincentian given the crime situation in this country today. How many older persons and others just returning from living a major part of their lives abroad have become victims of one sort of crime or another? What has the government done to wage war on crime such that we have had three new national records established for murders in a single year since 2001, the most recent being the current year, 2014? If this is the way to wage war on crime and the causes of crime then God help us. The Privy Council Ruling on James Mitchell vs Ephraim Georges The recent ruling by the Privy Council in the case of former Prime Minister, James Mitchell and Ephraim Georges, Commissioner in the renowned Ottley Hall Inquiry, is food for thought. The appellant is James Mitchell while the respondent is Ephraim Georges, the Commissioner in the Ottley Hall Inquiry. Here we wish to merely quote the Conclusion which states… 44. The extracts from the Interim Report set out above strongly support the conclusion that, having regard to the context and all the surrounding circumstances, the fair-minded observer would conclude that there is a real possibility that the respondent had made up his mind by the date of the Interim Report that the appellant was at the heart of the wrongdoing which led to the project and its collapse and would not be willing to change his mind, so that his final report would not be impartial. 45. In these circumstances the Board will humbly advise Her Majesty that the appeal should be allowed. The parties should make written submissions on the appropriate form of order and on costs within 21 days of this judgement being handed down. The provisional view of the Board is that, in addition to an order that the appeal be allowed, the only other order which it would be appropriate to make (apart from costs) is a direction that the respondent should take no further part in the Commission. As to costs, it is the provisional view of the Board that the respondent should pay the appellant’s costs before the Board and in the courts below. What was the Ottley Hall Inquiry all about? Was it intended to support the claims by the ULP while in Opposition, that the then ruling NDP was corrupt? What do you think? But here we are along the way and James Mitchell must be eternally grateful that we have not as yet removed the Privy Council as our final court of appeal? The ruling in Mitchell’s favour serves to confirm the claim by Eustace and others that despite their distance from us, indeed perhaps because of their distance from us, the Privy Council remains decidedly objective in their legal analyses. Listen again to what the Privy Council stated… 44. The extracts from the Interim Report set out above strongly support the conclusion that, having regard to the context and all the surrounding circumstances, the fair-minded observer would conclude that there is a real possibility that the respondent had made up his mind by the date of the Interim Report that the appellant was at the heart of the wrongdoing which led to the project and its collapse and would not be willing to change his mind, so that his final report would not be impartial. The respondent here is Ephraim Georges. Essentially the Privy Council ruled… that there is a real possibility that the respondent had made up his mind by the date of the Interim Report that the appellant was at the heart of the wrongdoing which led to the project and its collapse and would not be willing to change his mind, so that his final report would not be impartial Impartiality is at the very core of the administration of justice. The fact that the Privy Council could have ruled in these terms must be seen as particularly instructive and leaves us wondering about many, many things. In par 33, the ruling states… The Board has reached the conclusion that, contrary to the conclusions of the courts below, the Interim Report was expressed in such terms that the fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude that there was a real possibility that the respondent was biased such that he would not approach the remainder of the Inquiry with an open mind or, put another ay, that he would not conduct an impartial Inquiry, so far as the conduct of the appellant is concerned. The Privy Council is clear, in its own mind, that fair-mindedness was not going to be possible given the claims made by Georges. The issue of objectivity or rather lack of objectivity seems to have come into play. Essentially there seems a suggestion here that before the Inquiry was completed George’s may well have arrived at a conclusion in respect of James Mitchell and that this may prejudice any of the future proceedings. Of interest to us here in contemporary St Vincent and the Grenadines is that the Privy Council arrived at conclusions that were importantly different from the courts through which this matter had already passed. When such things happen it is often the case that the populace must necessarily raise eyebrows in respect of the previous rulings and question their bases. Is this not the case? When this happens the populace then reminds itself of other rulings and raise concerns about the judgements passed. The experience and judgements of some lawyers, magistrates and judges are always open to question. However, the average man in the street, anxious to avoid lawsuits and expensive lawyers, remains fearful of raising concern publicly. This is unfortunate. The public have, unfortunately all too often, given lawyers, magistrates and judges a certain aura of infallibility that they seem to take seriously. The public remain scared of these people. After all, they seem to have the power to dispense justice and mercy as they deem fit, based on their own analyses. But we as the public also have sense and ought not to readily lie prostrate before them. When we find them falling short, we seem amazed. The fact is that we ought to feel no pity for them. They feel no pity for us. We are all human beings struggling to survive in an increasingly evil world. All of us are called upon to be fair to each other. But we are so eager to see things in a particular light that we often fall short and end up being judged unfair to others. Truth is not always sought after in the world of politics. Indeed lies appear to be the preferred option. Politicians make things up, conjure up falsehoods then deceive themselves into believing them as truth even as they daily regurgitate. Too many of our politicians do not believe in the existence of a God even as they call on his name to win the votes of the electorate. Some politicians do not fear God, even as they profess to do so. Why do politicians lie? Why do politicians eager pursue and perpetrate falsehoods on others even as the hug and kiss and smile their way into the hallowed halls of Parliament? Who knows? We have been brought up believing that crime, deceit, falsehoods and corruption do no pay. When we look around; when we examine our Vincentian society ever so closely, what is the truth in this regard? We can only hope that the experience of this latest ruling by the Privy Council serves to open the eyes of Vincentians. Lawyers, magistrates and judges are far from infallible. In this regard they are like politicians. Indeed it is not in any way surprising that lawyers often turn to politics. Why do so many lawyers become politicians? It may well have to do with what they see themselves achieving in the field of law. Perhaps it is that they relish the obeisance they so often get from the poor who have no choice but to turn to them in need and pay whatever is demanded for their services. Perhaps too, lawyers become politicians because they too feel a certain sense of power and infallibility all wrapped up in one. In the end, it may well be that Ecclesiastes, was right when he declared… “Vanity of vanities,” says the Preacher, “All is vanity.” Ecclesiastes concluded… Fear God and keep His commandments. For this is man’s all. For God will bring every work into judgement, including every secret thing, Whether good or evil. J8 VAX Today the 20th day of December 2014, marks 2,980 days since the disappearance of SVG Air J8 VAX, if we are actually checking the day the plane disappeared on Sunday 19 November 2006 with pilot Dominic Gonsalves and one passenger, Rasheed Ibrahim. J8 SXY Today the 20th day of December 2014, marks 1,664 days since the disappearance of another SVG Air aircraft, J8 SXY, a Cessna 402. Just so you would remember, this aircraft left St Vincent in the evening of Thursday 5 August 2010 bound for Canouan. Like J8 VAX, the aircraft never reached its destination. It never completed its mercy mission. The plane disappeared and as yet no word has been received in respect of the lone occupant, the pilot, Suresh Lakram. The sad case of Patricia Bowman Just Another Look wishes to leave our listeners with the sad reminder of the gruesome death of Patricia Bowman. She died a cruel death on 19 September 2008, crushed by a collapsing wall in her own vehicle while on her way to work. Who cares? Where is justice in this matter? Nuff said!!! You have been listening to another edition of Nice Radio’s Callaloo presentation, Just Another Look. Just Another Look is an innovative, exciting, albeit decidedly provocative and controversial, socio-political analysis of issues of a local, regional and international nature. Just Another Look is heard only on Nice Radio on Saturdays at 6.00pm, with repeat broadcasts at 9.00pm on Sundays. Remember too that you can also catch us on the worldwide web, niceradio.info. You can check our JAL blog - vincyview I am, of course, Keith Joseph
Posted on: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 09:55:26 +0000