Tweet
Does Dr Vasciannie want to be solicitor-general?
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
We are fully aware that, at its core, the brouhaha over the rejection by the prime minister of Professor Stephen Vasciannie as solicitor-general is a constitutional issue.
And as with all constitutional issues, there are several possible interpretations, each of which can be quite plausible, especially to the layman.
So we don't intend here to give our interpretation of what the constitution says the prime minister can or cannot do in respect of a selection by the Public Service Commission (PSC). The question we wrestle with is whether, in fact, Dr Vasciannie wants to be solicitor-general.
True, he did the interview in which he is said to have outdone the other candidates, and he has so far not publicly indicated that he does not wish to fill the post.
However, we ask the question for a simple reason. Enormously bright man that he is, Dr Vasciannie does not need anyone to tell him that the solicitor-general of Jamaica must enjoy the confidence of the prime minister of Jamaica.
The prime minister must have no doubt in his mind that he can trust the advice of the solicitor-general, the chief lawyer in the Attorney-General's Office.
Conversely, the solicitor-general of Jamaica must know that he enjoys the confidence of the leader of Government. He or she must have no doubt that any advice given will be met with respect by the prime minister and members of his Government.
Here's where the problem is. In 1995 when Mr Bruce Golding left the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) to form the National Democratic Movement (NDM), one of his most talented recruits was Dr Stephen Vasciannie. It transpired that during the process of Mr Golding's return to the JLP, Dr Vasciannie had very strong words which indicated he felt personally betrayed.
In these circumstances, we believe that any relationship between the two gentlemen will be strained, to put it mildly. The stress level is easy to imagine.
On Mr Golding's part, he would always be wondering and worrying about whether Professor Vasciannie is giving him and his Government the best advice possible on what will be matters of extreme national interest. Is Dr Vasciannie over his personal disappointment with Mr Golding?
Can the prime minister go to bed feeling that the decision he has just made, based on advice from Dr Vasciannie, was indeed the best one? Could he be sure that the professor was not out to embarrass him and his Government?
On the other hand, can Dr Vasciannie be sure that the prime minister and members of his Government are not rejecting his advice just out of spite and to frustrate him?
And if a certain matter being discussed in confidence between them is somehow leaked to the Opposition or the Press, is that look of suspicion on the prime minister's face a suggestion that he could be thinking that the solicitor-general is the culprit?
In other words, what we are suggesting is that the need for mutual trust is critical between a prime minister and a solicitor-general for the relationship to work.
We understand, of course, that by this course of reasoning Dr Vasciannie finds himself in a pickle. Until and unless he and the prime minister kiss and make up, he cannot hope to attain the highest non-elected position in the Attorney-General's Office.
It's a position we don't envy him for.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
We are fully aware that, at its core, the brouhaha over the rejection by the prime minister of Professor Stephen Vasciannie as solicitor-general is a constitutional issue.
And as with all constitutional issues, there are several possible interpretations, each of which can be quite plausible, especially to the layman.
So we don't intend here to give our interpretation of what the constitution says the prime minister can or cannot do in respect of a selection by the Public Service Commission (PSC). The question we wrestle with is whether, in fact, Dr Vasciannie wants to be solicitor-general.
True, he did the interview in which he is said to have outdone the other candidates, and he has so far not publicly indicated that he does not wish to fill the post.
However, we ask the question for a simple reason. Enormously bright man that he is, Dr Vasciannie does not need anyone to tell him that the solicitor-general of Jamaica must enjoy the confidence of the prime minister of Jamaica.
The prime minister must have no doubt in his mind that he can trust the advice of the solicitor-general, the chief lawyer in the Attorney-General's Office.
Conversely, the solicitor-general of Jamaica must know that he enjoys the confidence of the leader of Government. He or she must have no doubt that any advice given will be met with respect by the prime minister and members of his Government.
Here's where the problem is. In 1995 when Mr Bruce Golding left the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) to form the National Democratic Movement (NDM), one of his most talented recruits was Dr Stephen Vasciannie. It transpired that during the process of Mr Golding's return to the JLP, Dr Vasciannie had very strong words which indicated he felt personally betrayed.
In these circumstances, we believe that any relationship between the two gentlemen will be strained, to put it mildly. The stress level is easy to imagine.
On Mr Golding's part, he would always be wondering and worrying about whether Professor Vasciannie is giving him and his Government the best advice possible on what will be matters of extreme national interest. Is Dr Vasciannie over his personal disappointment with Mr Golding?
Can the prime minister go to bed feeling that the decision he has just made, based on advice from Dr Vasciannie, was indeed the best one? Could he be sure that the professor was not out to embarrass him and his Government?
On the other hand, can Dr Vasciannie be sure that the prime minister and members of his Government are not rejecting his advice just out of spite and to frustrate him?
And if a certain matter being discussed in confidence between them is somehow leaked to the Opposition or the Press, is that look of suspicion on the prime minister's face a suggestion that he could be thinking that the solicitor-general is the culprit?
In other words, what we are suggesting is that the need for mutual trust is critical between a prime minister and a solicitor-general for the relationship to work.
We understand, of course, that by this course of reasoning Dr Vasciannie finds himself in a pickle. Until and unless he and the prime minister kiss and make up, he cannot hope to attain the highest non-elected position in the Attorney-General's Office.
It's a position we don't envy him for.