$36-Million Man
Published: Saturday | May 15, 20100 Comments and 0 Reactions
The Editor, Sir:
The recent revelations in Parliament by Prime Minister Bruce Golding that he sanctioned the proposal to engage Manatt, Phelps & Phillips to negotiate with the United States State Department in the Christopher 'Dudus' Coke extradition matter is cause for serious concern and has left the Government and people of Jamaica in a very compromising position.
The prime minister has tried to make a distinction between the Government and the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), whose members form the current administration. It seems disingenuous that this separation is being made to dupe the people of Jamaica. The prime minister has always been the leader of the party who has the majority in Parliament.
Golding's blunders
Mr Golding was asked eight weeks ago about his government's involvement in engaging the US law firm, and he vehemently denied any connection with the firm and the Government. That was despite the fact that the country's paid solicitor general and minister of state in the foreign affairs ministry had met with lawyers/representatives of the firm.
The prime minister took us down the road of confrontation with the United States, claiming that the US got information illegally through a policeman who breached our wiretap laws. He waged a verbal battle in Parliament about constitutional rights not beginning at Liguanea, referring to the location of the United States Embassy - all the time with the knowledge that his party, sanctioned by him, was trying to get an alleged drug trafficker and gunrunner off the hook of justice in the United States.
The JLP, led by Golding, was content with expending $36 million in the defence of the alleged trafficker. This person is indeed very valuable to the governing party, and I wonder what else this kind of money could have done for the people of West Kingston. What is the value of the alleged trafficker to the party?
The Government/JLP is at the moment being viewed with a great credibility deficit, and this goes to the heart of its ability to govern. Under our Westminster system of government, the issue of collective responsibility guides the Cabinet. The questions then have to be asked:
1. Who in the Cabinet knew about the engagement of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips?
2. Who authorised State Minister Dr Ronald Robinson and the solicitor general to meet with representatives of the law firm?
3. Who paid for the airfare and other expenses of the government officials who participated?
If some members of Cabinet were left out of the decision-making process on the matter, then they have a moral obligation to tender their resignation to the prime minister. If they refuse to do so, it means that they would be complicit in the decision. I am eager to hear from Dr Christopher Tufton and Andrew Holness, two of the party's rising stars, on the issue.
I am, etc.,
SHAWN JOHNSON
jamaicanshawn@yahoo.com
Mandeville
Published: Saturday | May 15, 20100 Comments and 0 Reactions
The Editor, Sir:
The recent revelations in Parliament by Prime Minister Bruce Golding that he sanctioned the proposal to engage Manatt, Phelps & Phillips to negotiate with the United States State Department in the Christopher 'Dudus' Coke extradition matter is cause for serious concern and has left the Government and people of Jamaica in a very compromising position.
The prime minister has tried to make a distinction between the Government and the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), whose members form the current administration. It seems disingenuous that this separation is being made to dupe the people of Jamaica. The prime minister has always been the leader of the party who has the majority in Parliament.
Golding's blunders
Mr Golding was asked eight weeks ago about his government's involvement in engaging the US law firm, and he vehemently denied any connection with the firm and the Government. That was despite the fact that the country's paid solicitor general and minister of state in the foreign affairs ministry had met with lawyers/representatives of the firm.
The prime minister took us down the road of confrontation with the United States, claiming that the US got information illegally through a policeman who breached our wiretap laws. He waged a verbal battle in Parliament about constitutional rights not beginning at Liguanea, referring to the location of the United States Embassy - all the time with the knowledge that his party, sanctioned by him, was trying to get an alleged drug trafficker and gunrunner off the hook of justice in the United States.
The JLP, led by Golding, was content with expending $36 million in the defence of the alleged trafficker. This person is indeed very valuable to the governing party, and I wonder what else this kind of money could have done for the people of West Kingston. What is the value of the alleged trafficker to the party?
The Government/JLP is at the moment being viewed with a great credibility deficit, and this goes to the heart of its ability to govern. Under our Westminster system of government, the issue of collective responsibility guides the Cabinet. The questions then have to be asked:
1. Who in the Cabinet knew about the engagement of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips?
2. Who authorised State Minister Dr Ronald Robinson and the solicitor general to meet with representatives of the law firm?
3. Who paid for the airfare and other expenses of the government officials who participated?
If some members of Cabinet were left out of the decision-making process on the matter, then they have a moral obligation to tender their resignation to the prime minister. If they refuse to do so, it means that they would be complicit in the decision. I am eager to hear from Dr Christopher Tufton and Andrew Holness, two of the party's rising stars, on the issue.
I am, etc.,
SHAWN JOHNSON
jamaicanshawn@yahoo.com
Mandeville
Comment