Tweet
How could you, Attorney General!
Wignall's World
Mark Wignall
Sunday, March 13, 2011
I have said it before and I will say it again. Pick any infinitesimal moment in Jamaica and in that speck of time, this land of ours it at once a fairy tale, a paradise, a puzzle and a horror story.
Thursday afternoon, the Dudus extradition/Manatt enquiry and all seems to be going well. Or so we are moved to believe. KD Knight, lawyer appearing on behalf of the PNP, is doing his job, asking questions and probing for specific answers. Attorney General and Justice Minister Dorothy Lightbourne seems more at ease than the day before, but the questions are no less penetrating.
She has even decided to actually face Knight and stare him in the eyes and direct her answers to him instead of the "Mr Chairman" bit as I had recommended in my Thursday column. The truth would eventually float to the surface, somewhere in the enquiry between questions and answers. Only the truth, or so we were hoping.
But then it happened, not a truth nor a barefaced lie nor some inanity in-between the two, but utter stupidity. And from the quarter that we would least expect it to come. Throughout the interface between Knight and Lightbourne, both trained lawyers, it didn't need any special prescience to determine that there was no love lost between them.
After all, in the enquiry, the JLP and the Government it forms began its stint there behind a cloud. Something dreadfully wrong had taken place, foolish judgements had been made and worse, human lives had been lost. It had happened under the watch and under the directions of the JLP administration and it was the prime minister who had sanctioned the enquiry. At every step thereafter, public servants and especially those at the political directorate level would be under fire from the lawyers appearing for the Opposition PNP.
During Knight's questioning of the Attorney General, just before the lunch break, subtle tension was masked by smiles and a few niceties. Then Miss Lightbourne, smiling, said what should never have been said during what must have been for her, an uncomfortable moment. She told KD Knight that he had told her that, 'All Labourite fi dead.' At the time she said it, Knight in response had said that his colleagues had told him to ignore the comment.
On the resumption, however, the game changed. Knight told the Commission that many had heard what Lightbourne had said and that he had gathered that it had made the news. As well it would, given the wide coverage locally and internationally that the enquiry has attracted. Knight demanded in stern language a withdrawal of the statement and an apology.
The commissioners called for a huddle in chambers but after the break and resumption, the Attorney General said she would only apologise to the Commission. Worse, she said that KD Knight had uttered the words to her in his private chambers after the JLP win in 1980.
Thirty-one years ago!
Was the learned Attorney General not in touch with the Jamaican saying, 'Is not everyting good fi eat, good fi talk'?
After another break during which the commissioners huddled with the protagonists, a personal apology to KD Knight — which was his demand after his claim that the statement could put his life in jeopardy — was still not forthcoming.
Wow, wow and wow!
That was how it was left on Thursday as I began to write this column. How did we reach here?
Let us give the Attorney General — as I said before, a lawyer and a politician who once ran unsuccessfully in the 1990s in a constituency in St Thomas — the benefit of the doubt. Let us assume that some unpleasant interaction did take place between them. If we do that, we would need to question ourselves and say, why would she need to bring up the matter, a private matter, which happened 31 years ago, and carry it to this very public Commission of Enquiry?
Additionally, being a lawyer, did Miss Lightbourne consider that while she was telling us what it is alleged Mr Knight said to her 31 years ago in private conversation, she would need corroboratory evidence to bring justice to her position at this very public enquiry?
I would like to think that Miss Lightbourne's outward show of confidence on Thursday was not all that it appeared to be. For that I would sympathise with her as the questioning from KD Knight has been relentless, pointed and very open in the answers he would like the public to hear. It is not an easy place to be — seated there, in actuality, in front of the world (think YouTube) knowing that she is on the firing line -- for days without straining under the pressure.
Additionally, if she withdraws the statement and apologises to KD Knight, it would not only be a psychological win for the PNP, but the real damage would be to her — that she said something of Knight that never really took place. In other words, what else did she say that was not on the same page as truth?
If she apologises ONLY for bringing up the matter, the consequence of that would be that it did happen but it was foolish to bring it up. Knight would, of course, never accept that.
So, as I write, not knowing what will take place on Friday, are we headed for a stalemate? Certainly the nation would like to hear the 'more' that the Attorney General knows, and I cannot see KD Knight withdrawing himself from further questioning her.
If all of that was terrible, it was reported that Security Minister Dwight Nelson, during one of the unfortunate breaks, had engaged in a verbal tussle with a PNP councillor. It was reported that in response to heckling, he said to the man, "You want a piece of me?" 
An old primary school teacher of mine would, if she were alive, say, "Dear God, we have certainly scraped the bottom."
Add to that Everald Warmington's rudeness to journalists in his continuing saga of atrocious public behaviour and it is easy to conclude that this administration is not only responding poorly to the political pressures of the times, but it is adding more by the crudity of its knee-jerk responses to those very pressures.
As an aside, when US President Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation on September 22, 1862 and issued it on January 1, 1863, in the very large area that is the US and the mode of communication then, it took over two-and-a-half years for the news to travel to Southwest Texas.
E-mails certainly weren't around then, and as our Attorney General shockingly admitted at the Manatt enquiry, she doesn't know how to use e-mail. One hopes, however, that in the very near future, she will be armed with all necessary information on important matters long before two-and-a-half years run out.
Then again, two-and-a-half years seem not to be on the radar for this administration, that is, if recent events are any indicator.
Party power not above the law
A reader e-mailed me the following in response to recent happenings with Everald Warmington, who has resigned his seat and is set to regain it by default because the weak-kneed PNP has decided not to contest the by-election.
"I am one of that group of Jamaicans that vote with their conscience for whichever political party seems best equipped to lead the country at the time. I have done so since I first voted in 1972 and I carry no card or flag for any party.
"Recently, Prime Minister Golding came on national television and told us Jamaicans that he was fully aware of the fact that at least five of the JLP members of parliament were holding their seats illegally since 2007, having won their seats while holding foreign citizenship. He said that he did not reveal the facts to the nation until they had each settled their status, in order to avoid the possibility of his party losing a 'no-confidence' vote in the House due to the JLP members being less than the PNP members.
'This action indicates that Mr Golding holds party power as being more important than the laws of Jamaica, which he has sworn to uphold. He has deliberately hidden five major breaches of the laws of Jamaica from the people, for party-political reasons.
The correct thing to do would have been to ask the GG to dissolve Parliament immediately and then call new elections with a clean slate of candidates. He would have gained the respect of the people. It does not matter whether we think that the law is right or wrong, it is still the law and it must be upheld. How many other laws has he breached that we do not yet know about?
"Do we want a Prime Minister, or Minister of Finance, that can destroy our economy and then jump on a plane and fly happily to the US or Canada as a citizen, leaving us poor plebs to suffer? I think not! We Jamaicans must not allow the politicians to change this law without a referendum. The persons who represent us must be selected from among us! They must be persons who share the same hardships, risks, and challenges, as we do. They should not have parachutes to allow them to do foolishness and then run away.
"In my estimation, Mr Golding's action in this citizenship affair is worse than Mr Davies admitting in 2003 to using public funds to boost his party's chances, worse than the Trafigura affair, and worse than the 'Dudus' debacle.
"I am no fan of Mr Seaga, but I am forced to admit that he was RIGHT! There is no-one left in the JLP that is capable of running this country, because if there was, that person would long ago have initiated a movement to oust Mr Golding."
Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/colum...#ixzz1GUNtmR49
Wignall's World
Mark Wignall
Sunday, March 13, 2011
I have said it before and I will say it again. Pick any infinitesimal moment in Jamaica and in that speck of time, this land of ours it at once a fairy tale, a paradise, a puzzle and a horror story.
Thursday afternoon, the Dudus extradition/Manatt enquiry and all seems to be going well. Or so we are moved to believe. KD Knight, lawyer appearing on behalf of the PNP, is doing his job, asking questions and probing for specific answers. Attorney General and Justice Minister Dorothy Lightbourne seems more at ease than the day before, but the questions are no less penetrating.
She has even decided to actually face Knight and stare him in the eyes and direct her answers to him instead of the "Mr Chairman" bit as I had recommended in my Thursday column. The truth would eventually float to the surface, somewhere in the enquiry between questions and answers. Only the truth, or so we were hoping.
But then it happened, not a truth nor a barefaced lie nor some inanity in-between the two, but utter stupidity. And from the quarter that we would least expect it to come. Throughout the interface between Knight and Lightbourne, both trained lawyers, it didn't need any special prescience to determine that there was no love lost between them.
After all, in the enquiry, the JLP and the Government it forms began its stint there behind a cloud. Something dreadfully wrong had taken place, foolish judgements had been made and worse, human lives had been lost. It had happened under the watch and under the directions of the JLP administration and it was the prime minister who had sanctioned the enquiry. At every step thereafter, public servants and especially those at the political directorate level would be under fire from the lawyers appearing for the Opposition PNP.
During Knight's questioning of the Attorney General, just before the lunch break, subtle tension was masked by smiles and a few niceties. Then Miss Lightbourne, smiling, said what should never have been said during what must have been for her, an uncomfortable moment. She told KD Knight that he had told her that, 'All Labourite fi dead.' At the time she said it, Knight in response had said that his colleagues had told him to ignore the comment.
On the resumption, however, the game changed. Knight told the Commission that many had heard what Lightbourne had said and that he had gathered that it had made the news. As well it would, given the wide coverage locally and internationally that the enquiry has attracted. Knight demanded in stern language a withdrawal of the statement and an apology.
The commissioners called for a huddle in chambers but after the break and resumption, the Attorney General said she would only apologise to the Commission. Worse, she said that KD Knight had uttered the words to her in his private chambers after the JLP win in 1980.
Thirty-one years ago!
Was the learned Attorney General not in touch with the Jamaican saying, 'Is not everyting good fi eat, good fi talk'?
After another break during which the commissioners huddled with the protagonists, a personal apology to KD Knight — which was his demand after his claim that the statement could put his life in jeopardy — was still not forthcoming.
Wow, wow and wow!
That was how it was left on Thursday as I began to write this column. How did we reach here?
Let us give the Attorney General — as I said before, a lawyer and a politician who once ran unsuccessfully in the 1990s in a constituency in St Thomas — the benefit of the doubt. Let us assume that some unpleasant interaction did take place between them. If we do that, we would need to question ourselves and say, why would she need to bring up the matter, a private matter, which happened 31 years ago, and carry it to this very public Commission of Enquiry?
Additionally, being a lawyer, did Miss Lightbourne consider that while she was telling us what it is alleged Mr Knight said to her 31 years ago in private conversation, she would need corroboratory evidence to bring justice to her position at this very public enquiry?
I would like to think that Miss Lightbourne's outward show of confidence on Thursday was not all that it appeared to be. For that I would sympathise with her as the questioning from KD Knight has been relentless, pointed and very open in the answers he would like the public to hear. It is not an easy place to be — seated there, in actuality, in front of the world (think YouTube) knowing that she is on the firing line -- for days without straining under the pressure.
Additionally, if she withdraws the statement and apologises to KD Knight, it would not only be a psychological win for the PNP, but the real damage would be to her — that she said something of Knight that never really took place. In other words, what else did she say that was not on the same page as truth?
If she apologises ONLY for bringing up the matter, the consequence of that would be that it did happen but it was foolish to bring it up. Knight would, of course, never accept that.
So, as I write, not knowing what will take place on Friday, are we headed for a stalemate? Certainly the nation would like to hear the 'more' that the Attorney General knows, and I cannot see KD Knight withdrawing himself from further questioning her.
If all of that was terrible, it was reported that Security Minister Dwight Nelson, during one of the unfortunate breaks, had engaged in a verbal tussle with a PNP councillor. It was reported that in response to heckling, he said to the man, "You want a piece of me?"
An old primary school teacher of mine would, if she were alive, say, "Dear God, we have certainly scraped the bottom."
Add to that Everald Warmington's rudeness to journalists in his continuing saga of atrocious public behaviour and it is easy to conclude that this administration is not only responding poorly to the political pressures of the times, but it is adding more by the crudity of its knee-jerk responses to those very pressures.
As an aside, when US President Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation on September 22, 1862 and issued it on January 1, 1863, in the very large area that is the US and the mode of communication then, it took over two-and-a-half years for the news to travel to Southwest Texas.
E-mails certainly weren't around then, and as our Attorney General shockingly admitted at the Manatt enquiry, she doesn't know how to use e-mail.
One hopes, however, that in the very near future, she will be armed with all necessary information on important matters long before two-and-a-half years run out.Then again, two-and-a-half years seem not to be on the radar for this administration, that is, if recent events are any indicator.
Party power not above the law
A reader e-mailed me the following in response to recent happenings with Everald Warmington, who has resigned his seat and is set to regain it by default because the weak-kneed PNP has decided not to contest the by-election.
"I am one of that group of Jamaicans that vote with their conscience for whichever political party seems best equipped to lead the country at the time. I have done so since I first voted in 1972 and I carry no card or flag for any party.
"Recently, Prime Minister Golding came on national television and told us Jamaicans that he was fully aware of the fact that at least five of the JLP members of parliament were holding their seats illegally since 2007, having won their seats while holding foreign citizenship. He said that he did not reveal the facts to the nation until they had each settled their status, in order to avoid the possibility of his party losing a 'no-confidence' vote in the House due to the JLP members being less than the PNP members.
'This action indicates that Mr Golding holds party power as being more important than the laws of Jamaica, which he has sworn to uphold. He has deliberately hidden five major breaches of the laws of Jamaica from the people, for party-political reasons.
The correct thing to do would have been to ask the GG to dissolve Parliament immediately and then call new elections with a clean slate of candidates. He would have gained the respect of the people. It does not matter whether we think that the law is right or wrong, it is still the law and it must be upheld. How many other laws has he breached that we do not yet know about?
"Do we want a Prime Minister, or Minister of Finance, that can destroy our economy and then jump on a plane and fly happily to the US or Canada as a citizen, leaving us poor plebs to suffer? I think not! We Jamaicans must not allow the politicians to change this law without a referendum. The persons who represent us must be selected from among us! They must be persons who share the same hardships, risks, and challenges, as we do. They should not have parachutes to allow them to do foolishness and then run away.
"In my estimation, Mr Golding's action in this citizenship affair is worse than Mr Davies admitting in 2003 to using public funds to boost his party's chances, worse than the Trafigura affair, and worse than the 'Dudus' debacle.
"I am no fan of Mr Seaga, but I am forced to admit that he was RIGHT! There is no-one left in the JLP that is capable of running this country, because if there was, that person would long ago have initiated a movement to oust Mr Golding."
Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/colum...#ixzz1GUNtmR49
Comment