Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

โ† Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

Chief Justice Designate Marston Gibson

Todayโ€™s Nation newspaper headline cries, CJ Hitch!

It was back in August BU broke the story – Barbados Government Selects Next Chief Justice From Outside The Inner Ring – of Marston Gibsonโ€™s selection as Chief Justice (CJ) Designate. His appointment was heralded then by Barbados Underground (BU) and we continue to support Gibsonโ€™s selection moreso in light of todayโ€™s Nation report. It is an open secret, endorsed by many who practice law and interact closely with the Judiciary, it is in urgent need of leadership from the top. A hindrance to accomplishing much needed efficiency within the bowels of our judicature has been the inability of recent CJs to make waste of the boys club of lawyers which has throttled the efficiency and effectiveness of Barbadosโ€™ Court System.

The Nation article exposes the move by โ€˜someโ€™ who have hijacked our Judiciary and now feel threatened by the coming of the 13th Chief Justice from outside the inner ring. We ask Barbadians to support Prime Minister Fruendel Stuart who is unfamiliar in the role of kicking butt, one which the late Prime Minister David Thompson performed with some competency as evidenced by his selection of CJ Designate Gibson. It is instructive when former President of the Barbados Bar Association (BBA) Wilfred Abrahams was asked by the local media to comment on Gibsonโ€™s selection he was conditional in his congratulations. He took the opportunity to inform the public that in his opinion suitable home grown candidates were available. On another occasion while on a radio talk show he was heard questioning the non extension of David Simmonsโ€™ term. Perhaps all has been explained with the selection of Wilfred Abrahams to represent the Barbados Labour Party in Christ Church East in the coming general election.

In any event, if there is a โ€˜snaggโ€™ as the Nation report suggests, an amendment of the Act requiring a simple majority can be passed on an urgent basis by the Lower House. BUโ€™s best research confirms such an amendment does not* require a change in the constitution which would necessitate a two thirds majority count. Given the intent by late Prime Minister David Thompson by selecting Gibsonโ€™s from outside the boys club, no doubt Prime Minister Stuart in his former role as AG would have been consulted, Barbadians would not question any precedent set if there is a need to go to parliament to remove any โ€˜snaggโ€™ if there is one.

Here is an opportunity for Prime Minister Fruendel Stuart to demonstrate he will unburden himself from the past and walk a new path regarding how we want our Judiciary to function. The legacy ofย  former Prime Minister Owen Arthur will continue to be troubled by the appointment of former CJ David Simmons. Note that BU is not questioning the reputation of David Simmons. The point has been made that the Judiciary in our system of governance requires it to operate under a separation of powers doctrine. The insensitive and ugly appointment of David Simmons to CJ having not served a โ€˜restโ€™ period after vacating the role of Attorney General has set a dangerous precedent which Barbadians must respond to with a collective shout of โ€˜never againโ€™ in this country. Given Arthurโ€™s recent return as Leader of the Opposition he should be made to promise Barbadians that he will not inject the spectre of politics in future appointments to the bench should he regain the office of Prime Minister.

The importance which the Judiciary has played in Barbados earning the good reputation as a stable jurisdiction cannot be underscored enough but recognizing that we have been struggling to meet the standard of previous years. The need to erase the suggestion ofย  political encroachment by the executive arm behoves Prime Minister Stuart to act hastily to pre-empt possible public uncertainty which may brew as a result of confusion surrounding Marston Gibsonโ€™s appointment.

Against the foregoing BU has it on good authority that the Prime Minister has done his round robin of the senior legal beavers, as his studied approach compels him to do, and he will be making an announcement on the matter shortly.ย  In fact the announcement may come as early as tomorrow. In the announcement he is expected to confirm the appointment of CJ Designate Marston Gibson.


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.


  1. As suggested in today’s Sunday Sun, there is a hitch surrounding the appointment. I am in favour of a person from outside the “inner circle” getting that posting. However, if there is some legal reason, or if it will be going against what is required, then I think it will be setting a bad precedent, then it means any party would be able to do as they like while in government. We must be very careful in mixing the judicary and politics as it leads to the breakdown of law and order and that is dangerous.


  2. If the appointment is contrary to law shouldnโ€™t it be pointed out? Isnโ€™t the application of the law paramount? The good news is that the Govโ€™t has been made aware of the โ€œoversightโ€ and can remedy the situation by amending the law.

    The nature of Barbadian politics is such as that sinister motives are applied to any and every issue. I think that whoever brought up this issue did the Govโ€™t a favour, imagine having to pass legislation after the fact to rectify a situation like this or worse having a newly appointed CJ vacate the position.


  3. Well if support is to be given would meaning changing the act to include the US as approved locations that should be too hard to do. would just need to have it in the order paper before parliament closes for Christmas.


  4. @David. Excellent report. Also, there is no snag as the Nation suggests, merely an ugly and last-ditch attemt to derail the appointment of Chief Justice Gibson and to thereby deny Bajans a court system of which they can be proud and that actually delivers justice, instead of the moribund and downright dead system left by one D. Simmons with the earnest support and connivance of his politicl master, one O. Arthur.

    The Nation report is crass and transparent and once again shows the unrelenting efforts by those formerly a part of the Executive to interfere with the Judiciary. There is no need to amend the Act. The appointment of Chief Justice Gibson can stand without that. Any lawyer worth his salt knows that. This latest is merely an attempt to diddle the public into thinking that something is wrong with the appointment and to score political brownie points.

    Most revealing of all, however, is the degree of desperation that must have initiated this pathetic subterfuge. Desperation because once Chief Justice Gibson is installed, there is the distinct possibility that heads will roll at the Registry, for so long the private preserve of Marie McCormack aka Lady Simmons, and subsequently by her understudies. Then too, certain judges may well feel that their jobs are not that secure any longer and that they may actually have to do some work to earn the $100,000+ per year, plus perquisites, from out of the public purse.

    That a newspaper would demean itself to print the sort of twaddle is of itself cautionary. As it holds itself up as a responsible organ of the press and pokes carping critism at social commentators, I would be interested to know just what legal advice the Nation took before rushing to print its politically biased report – AND FROM WHOM!!! A range of speculative names spring immediately to mind, but maybe the Nation would oblige us by naming these.

    I suppose the final ploy will be to try to persuade us all that Chief Justice Gibson was NOT born in Barbados and was NOT schooled in Barbados and is NOT a son of Bajan soil.


  5. @The Scout

    Did you express a similar reservation when David Simmons move from AG to CJ?

    @Sergeant

    BU agrees with your comment to a point. Many pushing against the appointment of Gibson are fighting to protect the status quo.


  6. We need to stop endorsing law breaking. If the man does not meet the criteria as laid out in the law, he should not be appointed; and if the Government means he must be the one then amend the legislation. Once again this debacle shows that the current government either does not understand governance or never bothers to do proper research.

    What really is separation of powers? If it is the appointment of a person with no ties to a political party, then isn’t the CJ designate ineligible. Again we are trying to transplant wholesale ideas of what ‘separation of powers’ means within the context of big countries to a 2×2 island with 22 people.


  7. David

    I will take the Nationโ€™s article at face value with regards for the qualifications required to serve as CJ. I know that perhaps there was some โ€œred meatโ€ thrown to partisans of the other side with the mention of mansion in an upscale area which was completely unnecessary.

    I am not a lawyer but Amused who seems to have more than a passing acquaintance with the legal profession has made his point so perhaps other members of the Bar who contribute from time to time can also contribute.

    How about it J Cumberbatch and Anonlegal?


  8. There are times in the lives of “men” when they must put their stamp on events; to publicly demonstrate who they are. The time has come sooner than expected, for the Prime Minister of Barbados Fruendel Stuart, to take the bow of ship Barbados into the eye of the storm, and decide where he will take ship Barbados.

    Is there to be a new dawn, or will we find ourselves be-calmed wallowing in the stagnant shallows?


  9. The performance, doctrine and decisions of legal luminaries are typically matters of record, so it probably does not matter a great deal that Mr Gibson has not practiced law in Barbados or in the Commonwealth. As long as he’s not some kind of extremist nut, and as long as he’s an experienced jurist, he is probably up to the job. At least he’s not one of Thompson’s ubiquitous and nepotistic Combermerians…


  10. Amused

    Could you explain why there no need to change the act ?


  11. @Enuff, Scout et al. I am completely satisified that there is no legal or other impement to the appointment of Chief Justice Gibson. I don’t even think of him as Chief Justice Designate any longer, but as The Chief. I would urge the Prime Minister to show his teeth as early as possible and make a public statement confirming the appointment of Chief Justice Gibson. End this nonsense right away.

    What amazes me is that BU led the story of Chief Justice Gibson’s appointment and was slavishly followed by the Nation and VOB. Do you seriously mean to tell me that no one has noticed that BU broke the story on August 14 this year AND IT HAS TAKEN ALMOST 4 MONTHS FOR THE POLITICAL MASTERS OF THE NATION TO COBBLE THEIR LATEST GARBAGE TOGETHER???!!! Believe me, if there had been a scinthilla of doubt about the appointment in the minds of the Nation’s political masters, we would have heard from them long since. As The Chief takes up his office 1st January 2011, the timing of this latest attempt at derailing is transparent and laughable and could only be cobbled together by a group of individuals who were instrumental in and supportive of the appointment of one D. Simmons (Sir).

    I am looking forward with keen expectation to the PM telling this bunch of imbeciles exactly what part of his anatomy they can kiss.

    I even more vexed now!


  12. @Anthony – ask Jeff. He is better at putting things in layman terms. Also, it is time for me to calm down and stopped being so vexed. The family complaining bad. If I don’t want a divorce, I better stop. Also, read The Chief’s CV – BU published it. I will say, before I get cut off, that NUFF noses out of joint because of The Chief’s appointment and at that I am VERY amused. Uh like it BAD!!!!!


  13. BU didn’t publish his cv it brief bio at best. Don’t really matter if the answer is complicated i will go research it myself . Just don’t see how it can be done without changing the legislation currently.


  14. Why am I not surprised at this attempt to stop this “outsider” from becoming the CJ of Bim?

    He is not “one a de boys” an he might pitch wid a big taw an like we nice glassies outta de ling.

    PM Stuart has a glorious opportunity and he must appoint Marston Gibson.

    If Legislation needs to be changed Just do it. It will send a message that will resonate outside of Barbados.

    Maybe the people of Barbados will get a Justice system to be proud of.


  15. @Amused, don’t forget “families first”.
    Yuh betta left de blog,keep de wife happy an come back when she gone sleep or I might have to reccomen a good divorce lawyer to save yuh.lol


  16. Parliament is the highest law making* body in the land. If, emphasis on if we need to amend the law to appoint a Bajan from outside the inner ring, it should be done without a second thought. In recent months we have heard Justice Kentish lament how our court processing has slowed, Leslie Haynes BBA president, Pilgrim aka Pilly and the list goes on of others agreeing yet we have some who would cry, don’t mess with the Judiciary.

    Justice DELAYED is Justice DENIED!


  17. I am watching you people carefully especially those who are very bias and I am asking you to recognize that there are views other than your view. The crass bias of some commenters is deplorable.

    I want what is best for Barbados, I dont care who is in power, After all the foolish -biased talk by some commenters. lets hope for the sake of this country that this DLP Government get it right, however I am not being convinced, I am not being impressed (apologies to Lil Rick) but I want Barbados to do well and if the DLP can do it -kudos to them. I WOULD BE HAPPY !


  18. Amused

    Do you seriously mean to tell me that no one has noticed that BU broke the story on August 14 this year AND IT HAS TAKEN ALMOST 4 MONTHS FOR THE POLITICAL MASTERS OF THE NATION TO COBBLE THEIR LATEST GARBAGE TOGETHER
    ********************
    On the contrary I think you should give these folks credit for being smart to bring this issue up at a time when it would cause some disquiet among the Govโ€™t (DLP). Do you think that anyone opposed to the appointment would not have researched the requirements for the post in all that time? If it was brought to the fore in August the Govโ€™t would have amended the law and we would have forgotten about it. Now it is in the open there is not enough time to amend the law prior to the year end and the swearing will have to wait.

    In the long run I think that he will be appointed but it will be a bit of egg on the DLP faces and another example of Govโ€™t ineptness.

    Its all politics


  19. @Hants. Uh escape detection for a moment. But it din just be spousal, yuh know, but de entire family – including de dogs. Dem de gang up pon muh. Yuh right in all you say. You got to pity poor Sargeant. Mekin excuse to cover a political gaffe. Poor fellow.

    But seriously, that is the problem. Politicizing at the expense of people’s rights to an effective judical system. We are paying for it and we have the right to it. And David is right – justice delayed is justice denied. I am perfectly content that no laws need to be amended for The Chief to take office. All I want is for the PM to make his announcement that let the yapping little political dogs get on with what they are determined to do – bite at people’s ankles and get kicked by an electorate that is FAR more savvy than politicians give us credit for.

    You mean to tell me that if the US attorney-general (a Bajan) was appointed to the bench in Barbados, some idiot would raise the objection that he was unqualified? It is also, as you pointed out, Hants, a matter of international perception and credibility. And since we rely HEAVILY on foreign investment, doesn’t it make sense to give comfort to those investors that we have a working judicial system, instead of the dead and done so-called judicial system we have now? Only people that (to quote David) are shitting pink are concerned. For the rest of us, I think we look forward to installation of The Chief and the Lazarus-like resurrection of a dead and buried judicial system. Please believe me, I am not exaggerating.

    As for Kentish and her inane remarks, pray ask her if she is being or has recently been sued and what she is/was being sued for. And if she isn’t prepared to deliver the details, never mind – I am just vexed enough to produce them for her. Remember, this is a matter of PUBLIC RECORD!!! And in the interest of the public I am prepared to put her comments into the correct light.

    Got to go now and not be vexed, otherwise I might not survive.


  20. @Amused

    As for Kentish and her inane remarks, pray ask her if she is being or has recently been sued and what she is/was being sued for. And if she isnโ€™t prepared to deliver the details, never mind โ€“ I am just vexed enough to produce them for her. Remember, this is a matter of PUBLIC RECORD!!! And in the interest of the public I am prepared to put her comments into the correct light.

    Not you got Hants in trouble with that one! Now pray tell what meek and mild Justice Kentish has done now.


  21. @David. Let me check first so I don’t make any statements that might be a breach of privilege or defamatory. I need to see what has been filed first and is in the public domain. Maybe I will have better luck with this file than a certain divorce file involving a certain big-up politician that the Registry has “misplaced”.


  22. I can never fully understand why Barbadians have difficulty in acceptance.Accept the fact that a new chief Justice will be in town and therefore haul and pull up!Ammend the law or append the law,whatever it takes to ensure that Mr.Gibson is given the opportunity to serve Bim well! So what is new? The DLP is in power,Frundel Stuart is Prime Minister,David Thompson es muerto, Owen Seymore is still rambling ROSE… and the devil in hell where he belongs.
    It is time that we speak what is on our minds but mind what we speak.Corruption was, is and evermore shall be.It is up to each one to choose which way to go. Sometime decisions are made to save a life by man made vows which break themselves in swearing.
    There is many a slip between the cup and the lip.Madam Justice Kentish is not the almighty.To err is human and she is human.One thing is for sure all the files in the world which we have on anyone…..can be a waste of time. Why? Ya ever hear ya gotta have a Godfather?
    Files have been known to have gone missing-people too.Like a source said when ya dead ya doan know and when ya know ya done dead. Such is life in the tropics! Never a dull moment!!!

  23. Jonnhy from Sin Michael Avatar
    Jonnhy from Sin Michael

    Ha ha…so the proverbial is just about starting to hit the fan…had to happen. lol….and it’ll only degenerate from here….give it two years and it’ll be much fun along the way…gonna be sport, starting now…haha…system..what system??? Like a baloon that just get leggo…haha


  24. I read in todayโ€™s SUN that โ€œthe appointment of a new Chief Justice for Barbados has run into a legal snagโ€, and that โ€œon the eve of Chief Justice designate Marston Gibson taking up the job, SUNDAY SUN investigations have revealed that a challenge has been made to the pending appointment, since it does not appear he meets all of the legal criteria to qualify for the top judicial post.โ€

    I read too that according to โ€œ Section 7 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, anyone who wants to become Chief Justice or a Court of Appeal judge in Barbados must have been practising for no fewer than 15 years in a Commonwealth jurisdiction, or serving during the prescribed period as a parliamentary counsel or as a professor or teacher of law at the University of the West Indies, or at a school for legal education approved by the Judicial and Legal Services Commission.โ€

    Now clearly according to this law, Gibson, a Rhodes Scholar with law degrees from the University of the West Indies (UWI) and Oxford University in England who has been residing in New York for the past 20 years and has been practising and teaching law there, is ineligible to be appointed the new Chief Justice for Barbados.
    Correct me if I am wrong here, please.

    I read also that โ€œthe late Prime Minister David Thompson had held talks with Gibson and approved his appointment as Barbadosโ€™ next Chief Justice,โ€ and that โ€œunder the Constitution, the Prime Minister, after consultation with the Leader of the Opposition, appoints the Chief Justice.

    Correct me if I am wrong, please. Was not the late Prime Minister David Thompson a lawyer? Is not Miss Mottley, who was then the Leader of the Opposition, also a lawyer? Do not our political leaders know the laws under which we are supposed to operate as a nation? Why did not these legal luminaries and political leaders make their choice according to the law? I only asking OK? Educate me here.

    How is it that folk here on BU are calling for the law to be changed to accommodate the appointment of this man? Is this setting a good precedent? I only asking OK? Educate me here.

    The Sun article noted that โ€œThe latest development has reportedly reopened the door for the top judicial post, with legal sources suggesting that Justice of Appeal Andrew Burgess was the front-runner. Also mentioned as a likely choice were Acting Chief Justice Sherman Moore and Justices of Appeal Sandra Mason and Peter Williams.โ€

    May I respectfully ask what is wrong with the Acting Chief Justice Sherman Moore continuing as Chief Justice until he reaches retirement age? Was he not appointed as acting Chief Justice by the same DLP administration, presumably according to the relevant law? I only asking OK? Educate me here. Do these fellows know what they are doing? Do they think before they act?

    What is wrong with appointing one from the list of Justices of Appeal Andrew Burgess, Sandra Mason or Peter Williams? Have they all practiced according to the provisions of the relevant law? I only asking OK? Educate me here. I willing to learn.

    I donโ€™t know Mr Gibson and so it does not matter to me if he is appointed or not. I only asking questions OK?

    I notice that there is a need for a new Chief Medical Officer. Do you suppose that you guys can get them to change the provisions so that I could get a little pick in this post? I only asking OK? Educate me here. After all, what is fair for the goose is good for the gander.

    Hants you know any body in your party that you can talk to on my behalf in this matter? Murdah. You think that the fellas could tweak or twink the law to accomodate me? (In NZ white out is marketted as Twink. Lol). I am sure that if BU was to run an article calling for me as CMO, that FREUNDEL would listen up!


  25. Chief Justice designate !
    Are you not a supporter of the DLP ?

    There is
    No Chief Justice -for too long now
    No deputy Prime Minister
    No Candidate for St.John
    Nothing coming from Fumbly Stew
    No Cabinet reshufle
    I have heard about Yes men
    But Fumbly Stew is a No man
    No Talk ! No Action
    Somebody please take a pulse: Somebody please stick a pin up Somebody’s ass quick


  26. @Dr.GP,
    You gettin lazy or wuh? You lookin to retire early?
    That job won’t challenge a brainiac like you.
    You could probably get a little 6 figure berry as a consultant to the Minister and the CMO.

    As for the CJ, It will not matter to Gibson because he is a maguffee in the States just like you an wunna fellas wid nuff qualifications don’t have to worry bout a job.

  27. My Name Is Not Sylvan Avatar
    My Name Is Not Sylvan

    The comedy of errors continues and the series of pathetic excuses continues as well.

    The law on the appointment of Chief Justice is clear. Apparently this bunch of jokers didn’t read the law before picking a very qualified Bajan to do the job.

    Now having placed themselves in an untenable position they now seek to blame it on “People resisting the appointment of an outsider”.

    Has he or has he not 15 years of experience in a Commonwealth jurisdiction?

    How can this fact be blamed on people “resisting the appointment of an outsider”?

    David the argument is unworthy of you.

    What credibility will this man have in upholding the law if they have to break it to appoint him?

    But then I suppose they will want to blame that on “people resisting” as well.

    No where in this will you see either Stuart or anyone else in the DLP take responsibility for their own screw up. They will blame “people entrenched in the status quo”, they will blame “BLP 5th columnists”, they will attack the lawyers for not cooperating.

    They selected a candidate that is not legally eligible. And now that they have embarrassed us all they will try to blame someone else.

    Pathetic!


  28. @My Name Is Not Sylvan

    Let us accept two of your points.

    The government might have gotten it wrong, woe to them.

    The other point that Gibson is qualified for the job. If he is why can’t the government amend the Act to pursue a qualified candidate if there is a loose end?

    The US recently changed their law to press for the extradition of Julian Assange in the aftermath of the WikiLeaks business.

  29. smooth chocolate Avatar

    I hope he is able become CJ so as to stop the ‘birds of a feather” families we have here in Barbados but if it is that he does not fit the total criteria and the DLP insist on an expatriate then i am sure they can find someone else who probably resides in UK or Canada or some island here in the c’bean that had practiced c’bean for 15 years at least. it is time we get rid of the likes of MMcormack, and the familiarity content.

    on a similar note, why is it that if you have very good grades and want to switch or do a degree in law at the UWI, you are declined but someone else of poor ‘barely made it’ grades are given the green light because their grand parent , mother, dad, aunt or uncle are in the legal fraternity in Barbados? people will want to deny it but it happens every year at Cave Hill. don’t even try to explain why a backward jackass could be accepted to study law and a straight ‘A’ student could be deny – we all know. it is things such as this that should make us want someone other than a resident in Barbados to be CJ. i know of a woman in a govt dept who have the full qualifications to study law and applied twice, each time she was turn down. on the second occasion a lawyer that was her friend that had no connection with the UWI was able to tell her that her, before she received a letter from the UWI, that she was not accepted. we are too small an island it seems to have honestly reigning. don’t get me wrong some young people do get thru but the majority of the bright who want to practice and have no family connection are not even considered. i know of one young lady, while waiting for her CAPE results knew before they returned that she was accepted to study law at UWI, cave hill, infact she had boasted that she will get in based on her name and she did, her friend who scored much better results did not.

  30. smooth chocolate Avatar

    @Georgie Porgie | December 13, 2010 at 12:00 AM |

    why don’t you apply for the post? you are doctor, practising for over 7 years, apply. i would love to see different blood in that post but really the post should go to Dr Elizabeth Ferdinand who was acting in if for a while until she was purposely overlooked for Dr. St. John who’s dad was Bruce St. John who. i am not old enough to know who he was but i don’t know if he at the time belonged to the BLP, however, Ferdindand was the one deserving the post or Dr. McCollin but neither got it


  31. If what is reported in yesterday’s Sunday Sun is correct and Mr. Gibson does not decline this ‘nomination’ immediately we should all be afraid – very afraid! Gladstone Holder must be turning in his grave.
    We should also be wary of those who would hold up the US as paragons of virtue when it comes to upholding the Law – any Law!

  32. My Name Is Not Sylvan Avatar
    My Name Is Not Sylvan

    David,

    If I had argued the position that you have just taken with the BLP instead of the DLP, you would have been the first to jump on me.

    Surely you of all people don’t want to debate the issues with the Government retroactively changing laws to justify their actions? I know the DLP has done this before in 1990 with regard to central bank limits on Government debt and look at where that ended up in 1991.

    No my broader point is, that this appointment is just symptomatic of a larger pattern of bumbling and mismanagement by this administration. My futher point is that the Government must “man up” and take responsibility for it’s actions, not try to blame the BLP or “people invested in the status quo” or “unsophisticated voters” or “recalcitrant civil servants” or “the recession” or “David Thompson’s illness or death”. I could continue, the list of “fall guys” for this administration’s ineptitude is endless.


  33. Georgie Porgie; I suspect that many people are not aware that the word “consultations” appears to have different meanings in general parlance and compared with when applied in a political context such as “the PM appoints someone after consultations with someone else”. In that context, the PM merely has to inform that “someone else” person before making the appointment. Nothing more, but usually significantly less.

    The situation could have gone like this:
    PM meets Opposition leader in corridor.
    PM: Hey Opposition leader I’m thinking of appointing person X to a very important post. You remember him?

    Opposition Leader; Yes. He’s really brilliant, one of the best legal minds I’ve ever met. But he was working outside the commonwealth for over 20 years. You certain he would be eligible?
    PM; Don’t worry about that.

    No matter what the Opposition leader says after that the PM would have fulfilled his constitutional duties.

    The above is just a completely made up scenario. But it appears that nearly all such consultations dating back to after independance, were made along the lines suggested.


  34. But, David he is not “qualified” as you say. Qualifications for Chief Justice include both a law degree and a certain number of years experience. What makes Gibson more qualified than a person with the same amount of years experience as him?


  35. @Anonus: “But, David he is not โ€œqualifiedโ€ as you say. Qualifications for Chief Justice include both a law degree and a certain number of years experience.

    From what I have read (I know none of the players) Gibson has the many years of experience — and more. Hell, he’s teaching law in the “great” US of A. You don’t teach law in the litigious US of A unless you know how the interpret law (any law) very competently.

    The sticky point (which some seem to be fixated on) is our local requirement for 15 years practising law in a “Commonwealth jurisdiction”.

    Perhaps it’s time we seek excellence to work for us from outside of the “jurisdiction” of our colonial masters?

    So that, perhaps, some things might change….


  36. @David. Let me be very clear. There is NO impedement of ANY KIND to The Chief not taking up his post. What we are seeing here is a lot of people out of the Bat Cave of the BLP who are scared for their jobs and want to protect their heretofore safe, secure and utterly incompetent sinecures, shitting pink and trying to blow smoke up Bajans’ fundamental orifices.

    I am sorry I am so busy at the moment, but if the government doesn’t do it for me, I am going to write in depth on exactly why there is no impedement to The Chief being installed – and at the same time I will see what I can do in respect of certain a certain law case brought against a D. Simmons appointee to the judiciary.

    It burns my butt to see these pathetic attempts by people who wish to represent and govern us to deny us a sound and independent judicial system. I believe the word to describe them collectively is “anarchist”. Or is it “dictatorship”.

    To borrow the phrase “Living in a bubble” from Dennis Johnson, let me say that this Sun article is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to force Bajans into a bubble for all eternity. Well, we far too ignorant to let them get away with it.


  37. CH,

    Maybe, although I am not sure that practicing under a different system of law give you sufficient experience to judge in another. Could a Barbadian lawyer then be eligible for a post on the US Supreme Court?

    We are not “fixating” on anything. That is what the law says.


  38. Amused,
    After all your empty words against the BLP and against the article in the Sun, would you mind telling us in a few sentences why there is no impediment to Gibson taking up the post?


  39. @Anonus…

    If I remember correctly, a great man once said “The law was made for man, not man for the law…

    @Anonus: “Maybe, although I am not sure that practicing under a different system of law give you sufficient experience to judge in another.

    I disagree. Anyone smart enough should easily be able to operate within any similar framework within which they are tasked.

    If I may use a software development analogy…

    My experience is those very knowledgeable and talented in the computer language C have absolutely no problem becoming extremely productive in the Perl language within a day or so.

    Similarly C++ and Java. Et al.

    In fact, my experience has been those programmers moving between different languages bring unique insight to their work in the new environment….

  40. My Name Is Not Sylvan Avatar
    My Name Is Not Sylvan

    @Amused….

    @David. Let me be very clear. There is NO impedement of ANY KIND to The Chief not taking up his post. What we are seeing here is a lot of people out of the Bat Cave of the BLP who are scared for their jobs and want to protect their heretofore safe, secure and utterly incompetent sinecures, shitting pink and trying to blow smoke up Bajansโ€™ fundamental orifices.

    Yawn

    Does the man fit the requirements outlined in the law or not?

    If you wanted to go outside of what is prescribed surely the thing to do would have been to have amended the law first, and then appointed the man? It’s not the BLP’s fault that you put the cart before the horse.

    Trying to blame your screw up on a “vast BLP conspiracy” , or people trying to protect sinecures, is pathetic.

    The only person who is “shitting pink and trying to blow smoke up Bajansโ€™ fundamental orifices.” is you.

    All of the big words, and verbiage won’t hide that fact.


  41. @ Hants
    No man I not getting lazy nor am I lookin to retire early
    I would find the job of CMO challenging man cause Iโ€™d be out in the villages wid my public health nurses seeking to change the status quo man—- but I doubt they would like my aggressive approach.


  42. @All… For the record, I’m apolitical. I just want to see the “job” done correctly and expediently.

    @My Name Is Not Sylvan: “If you wanted to go outside of what is prescribed surely the thing to do would have been to have amended the law first, and then appointed the man? Itโ€™s not the BLPโ€™s fault that you put the cart before the horse.

    Please correct me if I’m wrong here MNINS, but did not the previous government have a bit of a legal “hiccup” when they tried to activate the new Dodds Prison?

    Something about legalize about “Her Majesty’s Prison”?


  43. checkit-out | December 13, 2010 at 10:47 AM
    I have no doubt that the scenario you cited is very likely what happened, and that there is much merit in your statement that โ€œ.nearly all such consultations dating back to after independance, were made along the lines suggested.โ€

    This is very sad. We are supposed to be an educated people, and though we are quite as easy going populace, we deserve to have public officials doing the right things in such a way that the public can perceive that the right thing is being done. After all, these were the principles instilled in those of us of a certain age in our homes, at school and even in Sunday school. We know better.

    As I said before I have nothing against the person designated for the post, and I can appreciate the hope and desire of all those who long for greater proficiency in our courts, but it seems to me that to change or amend our laws (especially if they are well drafted) to accommodate anyone however well academically qualified will set up a poor precedent.

    It seems that the Chief Justice designate though academically qualified is not legally qualified according to the act that relates to such appointments.

    smooth chocolate | December 13, 2010 at 9:19 AM
    Thanks for your advice! I might just follow your suggestion and apply for the post of CMO. But I wont get it. I am not in the party in power (or other party). An I donโ€™t have an MPH etc.

    Dr Elizabeth Ferdinand has probably reached retirement age. Though I agree with you that she might have been overlooked in the past when Dr. St. John (who is a comparative junior by far) was appointed, I believe that Dr Ferdinand most likely declined. I donโ€™t agree that Dr. McCollin is deserving of the post from what I know of her. She is definitely not leadership material, and I found her to be lazyโ€ฆโ€ฆ..but she has been an MOH for at least 15 years ( before Joy St John.)

    Really what is required is some one with a more aggressive and proactive approach to the job. What is needed is some one who will get out of the Ministry and into the field and join with the Public Health nurses (some of whom have MPHโ€™s) and motivate and empower them to engage in innovative ways to improve healthcare at the periphery.This approach has been lacking since the late Sir Maurice Byer and the late Dr KR Rao, who were my Public Health teachers and mentors.

    smooth chocolate you have obviously told many truths in your post of December 13, 2010 at 9:14 AM except that you must know that MMcormack stepped down years ago when her husband stepped up to CJ!

    I wonder why several posters seem to think that the designated CJ will change the status quo, and be the Savior!

    SERPICO | December 13, 2010 at 9:52 AM
    Re If what is reported in yesterdayโ€™s Sunday Sun is correct and Mr. Gibson does not decline this โ€˜nominationโ€™ immediately we should all be afraid โ€“ very afraid! We should also be wary of those who would hold up the US as paragons of virtue when it comes to upholding the Law โ€“ any Law!
    I have no hesitation in agreeing with you 100% How on earth can we, the people support the Government retroactively changing laws to justify their actions? Surely this is dangerous!

    @ My Name Is Not Sylvan | December 13, 2010 at 10:34 AM |
    โ€œthis appointment is just symptomatic of a larger pattern of bumbling and mismanagement by this administration. My futher point is that the Government must โ€œman upโ€ and take responsibility for itโ€™s actions, not try to blame the BLP or โ€œpeople invested in the status quoโ€ or โ€œunsophisticated votersโ€ or โ€œrecalcitrant civil servantsโ€ or โ€œthe recessionโ€ or โ€œDavid Thompsonโ€™s illness or deathโ€. I could continue, the list of โ€œfall guysโ€ for this administrationโ€™s ineptitude is endless.โ€
    The above is sound doctrine that can not be refuted /disputed


  44. GP I would still like you to apply for CMO. I think you are BRILLIANT in your profession. Strong headed at times BUT I think that, this is what is needed to get things moving.

    Why don’t ya? What party what ……… You never know until you try ……….

    YOU don’t have a thing to loose. Personally, I would feel quite comfortable knowing that you had tried than not to have tried at all.


  45. @Georgie Porgie: “As I said before I have nothing against the person designated for the post, and I can appreciate the hope and desire of all those who long for greater proficiency in our courts, but it seems to me that to change or amend our laws (especially if they are well drafted) to accommodate anyone however well academically qualified will set up a poor precedent.

    @GP… With respect, what you have to understand is that no “living” languages remains the same over time.

    If you haven’t yet read it, please see “The Professor and the Madman: A Tale of Murder, Insanity, and the Making of The Oxford English Dictionary”. It is a beautifully written, informative, and historically accurate document.

    Since the (human) languages by which our laws are written are not unchanging, is it not logical to conclude that our laws should not remain unchanging either?


  46. Perhaps, just perhaps – when this requirement was drafted – it was not envisaged that someone of the calibre of Marston Gibson would be Chief Justice of Barbados from the USA, and more to the point, he would be or could be a NATIVE SON OF BARBADOS.


  47. @Chris. Well done.

    @My Name Is Not Sylvan. Just part of, “when I am not so busy” do you NOT understand? Just what part of my statement that I will provide the LEGAL grounds refuting the Nation/Sun article do you NOT understand? You realise that now I am going to do it for spite AND I am going to give details on which member of the judiciary has been sued and for what!!! You want political embarrassment? I am going to oblige you.

    Whether the judiciary likes it or not, the lawyers are fed up with it, the people are fed up with it and there WILL be change and no amount of suberfuge will derail that change. And if any political party or its judicial todies and support organisations try to stand in the way, we will trample you so far underground that you may never be able to dig yourselves out.

    You mean to tell me that any member of the Barbados Bar can go to Canada, take a six month course in Canadian procedure and be called to any one of the several law societies, but that some political retards in Barbados are objecting on no sound legal basis at all to the appointment of a Bajan man from a poor, black background who has distinguished himself as lawyer (in two jurisdictions – England from which we take our common law and the USA from which we adopt many of the legal precedents) and judge in the USA and whose first law degree is Caribbean? I also find it interesting (and Jeff can and has confirmed this) that Marston Gibson has delivered many lectures to law students at Cave Hill. So some idiots are trying to suggest that he is okay to help train local lawyers at Cave Hill, but not to be Chief Justice?

    But you know the problem? Self interest!!!! Some legal hacks have convinced themselves that if they derail Chief Justice Gibson, they themselves will be appointed Chief Justice. Well, I got news for them. The vast majority of the Bar welcomes The Chief and we do not want either the also rans or the never weres. QCs or no QCs. We want Gibson!!!! So slink back into the Bat Cave – it should be dark enough for what wunnah like to do there. Take the Nation/Sun with you.


  48. The Nation obviously feels passionate about this issue. After making it a frontpage story yesterday they hammer home the point in its Monday editorial.

    @Chris

    Your last comment is not without merit. Assuming the government made a bobo despite Amused’s protestation to the contrary, the extent to which the content of the act would have to change would surely determine if it is precedent setting in any material way.

    All are agreed the man has the intellectual and administrative capacity to deliver at a time when such skills are urgently required. So what is the problem again?


  49. JC
    Thanks for your encouragement!
    Of course you know that without a strong head a man will fail.
    How you telling me that โ€ฆโ€ฆโ€ฆ You never know until you try โ€ฆโ€ฆโ€ฆ. and I have been trying wid so much sweet talk at you for years now and you wont even at least say that you will meet me by the clock in the Park (or are you too young to know bout those days?) LOL

    I wish that your note below referred to the above issue instead of the matter of the CMO!

    YOU donโ€™t have a thing to loose. Personally, I would feel quite comfortable knowing that you had tried than not to have tried at all.

    nOW YOU CANT SAY THAT WHAT EVER MY FAILINGS IN THE PAST HAVE BEEN THAT I HAVE NOT DECLARED MY INTENTION PUBLICALLY TO YOU ON BU
    KEEP SWEET HEAR
    LOL


  50. The law shouldnot be a schackle unto us. The commonwealth qualification issue is the most petty and obstructionist mode of operation for those who have an axe to grind….masquerading as strict consitutionalist. We have seen across the Caribbean in recent times where people in opposition have convieniently lauched legal attacks on people with dual citizenship issues in the same light, claiming their new found religion on upholding constitutional principle…only when it suits them. This case is no different.

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading