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 Marston Gibson
Chief Justice Marston Gibson

On June 19, 2004, Chief Justice Marston Gibson weighed in on the dispute that BU has been covering for some time. That of the Constitution vs the Legal Profession Act Cap 370A. BU has obtained a letter from the CJ to Mr Barry Gale QC, the president of the Bar Associationย  โ€“ see letter sent by the CJ to Barry Gale.

The history of the Constitution and the Legal Profession Act goes back to the very beginning of the Act and the formation of the BA. The BAโ€™s first president, Mr Jack Dear QC (later Sir John Dear) realising that the Act was fatally flawed and would not stand up to a constitutional challenge, declined to challenge attorneys who opted not to join the BA, most notably Mr Bobby Clarke, who has never been a member of the BA and between whom and Jack Dear, there was no love lost. If anything there was a mutual and well-known animosity. Successive presidents of the BA have also declined to involve themselves in a face-to-face fight against the Constitution, until the advent of Mr Leslie Haynes.

Chief Justice Douglas refused to involve himself, as did Chief Justice Williams and BU has already published the minutes of the BA in which a consultation between the Registrar, Simmons CJ and Simmons CJโ€™s then prospective son-in-law and BA president Wilfred Abrahams (now Senator Abrahams) in which the advice of Simmons CJ was to, in effect, left it lone โ€“ see Tales From The Courts &ndash XII;Barbados Bar Membership Revisited โ€“ Registrar and Sir David Simmons, Wilfred Abrahams Exposed

In order to practice law in Barbados, it is necessary to satisfy the Government, not the Courts, that you have the required qualifications, whereupon you pay your fees for a practice certificate that is issued by the Government, not by the Courts. That done, you have the right to practice. The determination of whether or not an attorney has the right to practice is a matter for GOVERNMENT, not the CJ.

The Constitution of Barbados, Chapter III PROTECTION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS OF THE INDIVIDUAL Section 21, specifically confers the right of association and assembly, OR NOT, except in specific cases, all of which involve matters of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public health; or that is reasonably required for the purpose of protecting the rights or freedoms of other persons; or that imposes restrictions upon public officers or members of a disciplined force. Attorneys do not come under any of those classifications.

In which case, the BA is a trade union and the right to opt out of membership of the BA is a fundamental human right given under the Constitution that cannot be overset by any other legislation.

In pursuance of its report into this issue and the letter from the CJ, BU has taken advice from two senior judges within the Commonwealth who are authorities on constitutional law. These, having expressed their astonishment and dismay at the CJโ€™s letter, have posed two questions in relation to the CJโ€™s letter and BU now passes these on.

  1. On what authority does the CJ think he can revoke and nullify an attorneyโ€™s practice certificate?
  2. In as much as a ruling on the matter requires a declaration from the Court, such a declaration can only come as a result of proceedings in court in which there is an applicant (the BA) and defendant(s) the dissenting attorneys. Has any such proceeding been brought?

If the CJ does not have the authority to revoke the practice certificates of attorneys and no proceeding has been brought, then the CJ has acted extra judicially and outside of the scope of his authority. Worse still, as he is CJ, he has rendered it impossible for any member of the judiciary to hear such a case, because of prejudice. Worst of all, he has denied the Constitution.

We all know that the Constitution was changed to allow Marston Gibson to take on the job of CJ. However, the changes to the Constitution that would give legitimacy to his latest faux pas would put Barbados at odds with the dictates of the United Nations in respect of the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual and cause considerable international censure and concern.

It is well known that the CJ has failed to obtain any support from the members of the Bench and support organisations, because he has shown no competence or understanding of the job he was hired to do, which is NOT to be an adornment on the cocktail circuit, as he seems to think. The only decision the CJ, the head of the judiciary, has given in his years in office has been to read a decision written by Williams AJ (retโ€™d). The CJ is yet to deliver a single decision under his own authorship. Instead, this head of the judiciary occupies his few judicial hours dealing with bail applications which, apparently, prevents him from responding in public to the concerns raised recently by the DPP, amongst others. He has seemingly decided that the role of CJ should be that of a glorified magistrate.

His letter to Barry Gale must be seen, therefore, as being political and not judicial and an attempt to garner support from those licensed legal practitioners who have chosen to be members of the BA (which is their right under the Constitution, in the same way that it is the right of other licensed legal practitioners NOT to be members of what is in effect a trade union).

Therefore, by acting extra-judicially, the CJ has conducted himself in a manner that constitutes gross misconduct and that brings the judicial system into disrepute.

Bajans of all walks of life have long been aware that the CJ has exhibited a total lack of competence and has no clue what his job is, or should be. It is time he went, which was not going to be so straightforward, until now. Now, the PM has all the grounds he could possibly need to either demand a resignation or to start the process of dismissal of Marston Gibson. And as Barbadosโ€™ foreign investment continues to decline to the extreme prejudice of the country and its peoples, we call on the Prime Minister to invoke the very Constitution that the CJ has decided to ignore (or doesnโ€™t understand) and get rid of this blot on our justice system.


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

138 responses to “Tales from the Courts – Has Chief Justice Gibson Brought the JUSTICE System into DISREPUTE? XXI”


  1. @David “We all know that the Constitution was changed to allow Marston Gibson to take on the job of CJ”

    Our grandparents who were not well educated, but who were very wise used to say that “if ya start wrong ya have to end wrong”

    We had no business changing the Constitution to accommodate Prime Minister’s Freundel’ Stuart’s friend/schoolmate.

    I worried than, and I worry now that this man had spent too much time away form Barbados, in the United States, and was no longer familiar enough with Barbados’ Constitution.

    But who have to listen to me? I am only a

    Simple Simon.


  2. “It is well known that the CJ has failed to obtain any support from the members of the Bench and support organisations, because he has shown no competence or understanding of the job he was hired to do, which is NOT to be an adornment on the cocktail circuit, as he seems to think.”

    Pray tell how the CJ has demonstrated his incompetence. There is no evidence that Bajans from all walks of life think that Sir Marston is incompetent. This attack is in very poor taste and it clearly shows that many of his detractors prefer a CJ who is snobbish and aloft and perhaps more palatable to what they consider to be more socially acceptable to them. Sir Marston inherited a judiciary steeped in poor management and he is expected to clean it up in just so.
    Let’s face it many of his detractors believe he is from the wrong side of the tracks. When we make such attacks we should at least show the evidence.

  3. PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926 TO 2014 , MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS OF BARBADOS, BLPand DLP=Massive Fruad Avatar
    PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926 TO 2014 , MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS OF BARBADOS, BLPand DLP=Massive Fruad

    Has read” have no right’ We are not to pay for Right, nor right, The CJ have no right nor Right , for the Rule nor rule in that manner,
    Paying for any kinds of right or Rights will then be dealing in fraud ,
    Natural Rights nor rights can only be taken after being dully convicted of a Crime or crime in a Court of Law, where the is an Injured Party.
    Who signed any thing against a lawyer that did not pay CASH, MONEY,or FUNDS.
    Sir Richard L Cheltenham then also need not have his renewed also on Whitepark road across from the GET HIGH COURT. Ralph Thorne QC also .


  4. This was obviously not authored by David. If we are right, then we can then assume that this comes from some one intimately connected to these issues. And William Skinner may very well have a point, that a tinge of the local variety of classism is at work here. Whereas the author may well be resting on several valid points of law, it seems to us that this issue has too much to do with protecting ‘rights’ of a class of people who violate the rights of the whole population every day. And even if we were to be persuaded that the CJ might not have been the best man/woman for the job. Then we’ll be at a loss be find a similar narrative in relation to previous CJs. No, we have no particular interest in defending lawyers’ rights when many more classes of people are ‘wronged’ more egregiously everyday, including by these very lawyers.

  5. jeff Cumberbatch Avatar
    jeff Cumberbatch

    This issue is also alive elsewhere and the matter is not at all open and shut. See the argument below in Belize:

    Attorney General Hon. Wilfred โ€œSediโ€ Elrington said that mandatory membership of the Bar Association is unconstitutional; but the associationโ€™s president Eamon Courtenay told the media on Tuesday that is not the case.
    โ€œSince this matter has been raised, some of our members have done some research, and have already found cases where this specific matter has come up, and it has been found not to be unconstitutional,โ€ Courtenay said.
    Current Bar Council Member and past president Jacqueline Marshalleck said that based on its preliminary research, the mandatory membership of other organizations has been found to be unconstitutional, but that is not the case with the Bar Association of Belize.
    The US Supreme Court has found that mandatory membership is not unconstitutional. And that is also the case with the European Court of Justice, Marshalleck said.
    The question, however, of its constitutionality has not been looked at in the Caribbean. Therefore, the Bar is seeking an outside legal opinion on that matter, she said.
    On Monday, the Bar Association held a meeting and came up a four-point plan on how it will go about the matter of the Attorney Generalโ€™s proposed amendment.
    Marshalleck told The Reporter Thursday that Bar members unanimously agreed to prepare and submit to the Attorney General comments on the draft Bill.
    In addition, the Bar has proposed to organize a committee that will include members of the Judiciary and officers from the Attorney Generalโ€™s office to discuss the proposed amendment.
    Last Tuesday, Elrington, speaking on the rationale for the proposed amendments to the Legal Professions Act, said to the media:
    โ€œWe are convinced that as it is presently constituted, the Legal Professions Act is unconstitutional as it relates to the requirement that all members of the profession have to belong to the Bar Association.
    Under the constitution, we have freedom of association. We should not have to belong to the Bar Association.โ€
    Elrington went on to say that he takes issue with the fact that attorneys are โ€œforcedโ€ to belong to an organization that โ€œdoes little, if anything, to promote the interest of attorneys at law.โ€
    Attorney Godfrey Smith, S.C., writing in his Flashpoint blog, agreed with Elringtonโ€™s sentiments and said: โ€œ
    โ€œThere is more than a kernel of truth in the Attorney Generalโ€™s accusations. But it is far from being the whole truthโ€
    Smith suggested some of the things that the bar could have been doing for the society, such as developing a legal-aid website โ€œthat encourages public self-help by providing free templates for things like wills, simple contracts, leases, bills of sale, deed polls, statutory declarations.โ€
    Smith also said that the association could have provided high school scholarships annually.
    โ€œReforms could have been initiated so that, as an example, persons wishing to divorce each other (without ascribing blame) could do so without requiring the services of an attorney.โ€
    Courtenay and other members of the Bar have refuted the claims that the Belize Bar Association has not been doing anything.
    โ€œThe Bar was very disappointed in some of the things that have been said, some of the criticisms that have been levelledโ€ฆโ€ Courtenay complained.
    โ€œWe believe that the best way to deal with this is to seek to engage the Attorney General, seek to engage the Government on some their concerns.โ€


  6. @Pachamama. “……it seems to us that this issue has too much to do with protecting โ€˜rightsโ€™ of a class of people who violate the rights of the whole population every day…”

    Many, yes. Not by any means all. That said, valid point, though I give qualified agreement only.

    @David. I saw the letter a little while ago, like a couple of weeks. I did wonder how long it would take for you to get your hands on it, as you seem to have insider information denied to, or ignored by, the Fourth Estate. While I hesitate entering the fray because of time constraints at the moment, the questions raised by the learned senior judges are precisely those I would posit myself. I would have to agree that this is a matter requiring a judicial declaration that can only come as a result of legal proceedings with a right of appeal even to the CCJ, of which there have been none. I would agree that the letter now makes it impossible for any judge to hear the matter, due to bias and prejudice, whether they actually agree with the CJ’s interpretation of the law, or not. I would agree that the courts have no say in the issue of practice certificates and that it is a matter for the executive. It therefore follows that the courts have no right to deny audience to someone with a practice certificate, absent a legal process resulting in that practice certificate being revoked. As I have said many times before, the independence of the judiciary is not absolute, so long as their salaries perquisites and pensions are paid by the taxpayer. In all the circumstances, therefore, I am forced, reluctantly, to consider the fact that the CJ may well have acted extra judicially and outside of the scope of his authority. Whether this constitutes gross misconduct or not is a question for a finding of fact and law by the proper commission of enquiry which I believe is the Privy Council, but it may be the CCJ and I do not have the time to look it up right now. But it is certain that such a commission ought to be required now by the PM if for other reason than to have clarity on this issue that has become a festering sore.

    As for Marston Gibson himself, I enthusiastically (and wrongly) espoused his appointment. I repeat yet again that I was wrong to do so, although I was not necessarily wrong in supporting the amendment to the Constitution that paved the way. The change was not necessarily wrong, but the person has certainly abundantly proved to be a disaster, and that is not putting it too strongly. Ross has intimated that Gibson must go….. and I agree. Give him an ambassadorship or something like that to save face, let him keep his knighthood…… and move on and find someone who can do the job. Even the membership of the BA, with the possible exception of his new BF, Barry Gale, will agree with that. If he won’t go for it, then start the Constitutional process, which requires his suspension, and make sure that it takes until he is 70, like the court cases do in the justice system of which he is head. So we continue to pay his salary….. so what? If we can get the courts working again with an acting CJ at the helm, then we will have the money from our foreign investments to be able to afford it.

    Back to work for me now explaining to people why their cases are taking so many years to come on for hearing and to get decisions and to explain to my bankers why my cash flow is so lamentable, necessitating selling assets.


  7. “In which case the BA is a trades union’

    ‘It is effectively a trades union”

    Now which is it and what is the argument that it is? It is certainly not a registered trades union.

    Now the CJ’s letter to Gale…it does not state that HE is revoking anything. It says he will write to the offending attorneys and inform other judicial officers. The revocation would have to come from the Bar Association as a corporate body surely. As such it reports to the CJ who is also the first line for appeals under the Act – and it is in that capacity that the CJ is writing.

    There is a good deal of question begging in this post. I realize it’s a BU hobbyhorse but essentially we’re back to square one. If you don’t like it, contest it.

    Of William Skinner

    “This attack is in very poor taste”

    Now come on Mr Skinner – BU does it all the time. And of course people from “all walks of life” would not be knowledgeable. I don’t know about your “wrong side of the tracks”: What I do know is that(bless him) the CJ has lost the confidence of most attorneys and certainly some members of the judiciary – for the reasons stated in the post. He is a nice man but, sadly, a poor choice.

    Another ‘leaked’ letter? Wonder how that one got out. Any ideas BU?


  8. And now I’ve seen Amused’s post – I don’t accept the bias argument but then I have more faith in (most of) our judges than he/BU. As to whether the CJ should go…well, what I want is that he should act as a “good and faithful servant” in that position should. But if he did go I don’t think the ‘science of law’ in Bim would be the worse for it.


  9. @David. Another couple of points that may assist on this.

    I read in the Nation about 6 weeks ago something from the BA that discusses the independence of the judiciary. This independence resides in the individual judge him or her self. The CJ has no power to make a decision on a case, unless he himself is judging it and he has no power to exert any influence over another judge who is trying a case. It seemed to me at the time that the meaning of jurisprudence is not clearly known by the author of that article.

    By extension, therefore, the conduct of both the CJ and Barry Gale is highly improper in the present context. The CJ has chosen to receive from Barry Gale a private letter which can only be seen as a request for a legal opinion. It is highly improper for the CJ to have involved himself in this issue. And he has responded to Barry giving an opinion masquerading as a judicial decision on a matter on which no proceedings have been filed and no defence has been obtained. The merits of the BA vs certain attorneys notwithstanding, the conduct of both Barry and the CJ is highly improper and a commission of enquiry now has got to be held to remove the CJ from office if he does not, as he should, tender his resignation. So I repeat, whether the BA is right or not in its interpretation of the law, is not relevant here. What IS relevant is how the CJ has conducted himself, not only as CJ, but as a judge. Reprehensible and unacceptable conduct that if he does not voluntarily resign over, he must be required to explain himself and to state on what authority he has acted as he has so acted.


  10. @ Amused

    Yes, we might have been inartful. How would you describe the evidence, not proof, that lawyers routinely ‘comingle’ client funds etc. And is not a single breach of trust generalizable to the entire population?


  11. @Ross. I am respectfully requesting that you revisit your opinion about bias. I have not in any way impugned the fairness and lack of bias of the sitting judges in their individual capacities. That said, if the head of the judiciary has issued such an instruction through the Registrar by which he seeks to instruct the judiciary, then, whatever their personal feelings on the matter may be, the APPEARANCE of bias exists. My observations in the past on the judges is restricted to quality and timeliness and I have never, even by inference, suggested an element of bias in relation to any of them.


  12. “He has chosen to receive a private letter”

    Sorry Amused. How can it be a private letter if from the President of the BA to the CJ to whom under statute he reports? Aren’t you really grumbling about someone who has had the guts to throw down the gauntlet to you. Now pick it up.


  13. I don’t think there’s even the semblance of bias. Judges sit in judgment on other judges every day. That’s their job.


  14. @Pachamama. I agree that it happens and that it is a disgrace and that there is no excuse for it ever. However, I do point out that it is SOME lawyers and by no means whatever ALL lawyers. Personally, I would be quite content to see the ones that do sent to Dodds for the rest of their natural lives as they bring the profession into disgrace and disrepute. Basically, they are no better than the many defendants charged yearly with theft – and they are deserving of the same treatment, without exception. I would go so far as to say that these lawyers are worse then casual thieves, because when they act in this way, they betray trust as well.


  15. @Ross. If you don’t see my point, that is your right. I see no gauntlet that I feel I need to pick up. I gone. Got of lot of work, some of which I may actually eventually get paid for.


  16. Simple Simon

    I am sorry if the Barbadian Constitution is written in stone because this obviously signal little or not change to the existing system. A Constitution ought and must be designed on the process of growth and not the state of being, you and your antiquated thinking friends expect it to be.


  17. @Amused

    Thanks for insight as usual.

    @Jeff

    Interesting, a matter which a burgeoning legal profession in Barbados must take pride at some point to resolve. It is a black eye for Barbados. Any blog which is posted without being attribited to an author is endorsed by BU. To say that the Barbados judiciary continues to slide since the appointment of Marson Gibson we believe to be accurate.


  18. Simple Simon

    You have accused the PM of changing to Constitution to accommodated his friends but you fell short of informing persons like myself who aren’t quite familiar with the process there in Barbados, how he did it. Simple, if what you’re saying is true: then how comes there wasn’t a greater moral outcry against this egregious breach of the people’s trust, especially by the legal minds in Barbados?


  19. LOL


  20. Dompey…I’m ‘loling’ David not you.


  21. Simple Simon

    Does this lack of social activism on the part of the Barbadian public speaks to quality leadership in Barbados? We have had a march at a time when intelligent minds would have thought that there would have been a great turnout, to David and Bobby Clarke’s disappointment.

  22. PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926 TO 2014 , MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS OF BARBADOS, BLPand DLP=Massive Fruad Avatar
    PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926 TO 2014 , MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS OF BARBADOS, BLPand DLP=Massive Fruad

    Attorney General Hon. Wilfred โ€œSediโ€ Elrington said that mandatory membership of the Bar Association is unconstitutional;@ @ Agree, Rights and rights , Right to contract ,

    To joint it American Style
    To hide the Bad lawyer just by paying dues to say they are in good standing , Crooks den.


  23. @ Amused

    And with all due respect to you, it seems to us that all the people that were exposed were somehow able to avoid the normal operations of ‘justice’ of which you so eloquently spoke. And yes it is a dangerous development when we get to the point of denying the rights of a class of people because of the reason cited by us. We are very uncomfortable with that. But how else can we deal with these issues.


  24. Reading Jeff Cumberbatch’s post, I can only say that this matter seems to be occupying the minds of jurisdictions elsewhere. I am still waiting on somebody to tell me how, when and where , Sir Marston has been “grossly incompetent”. I maintain that had he come from the acceptable social class the attacks on him would have been almost non-existent. He is by far the most publicly engaged CJ we have ever had; he has no airs or pretense to airs and he brings a refreshing presence to the office. I do not know of Sir Marston being involved in shady land deals or carrying any political baggage. I know of no decision that he has made that has thrown the judiciary into disarray. Nobody to date has given any example of improper behaviour on his part.Sir Marston has not to the best of my knowledge been involved in the disappearance of any citizen with high political connections. He has not been accused of using high office to tap citizens’ phone calls. I maintain that this attack is coming from sources who find him socially unacceptable and are pissed off because they don’t have a direct line to him and his office. It reminds when the current Governor General was made a judge. Some of his colleagues were “appalled” that a “barefoot boy from St. Andrew” (I think) could be elevated to such heights. Knowing personally of Sir. Marston’s roots, I can assure all his detractors that it is not in his DNA to allow such baseless and essentially wicked attacks to stop him from executing his duties without fear and cleaning up one of the most corrupt professions that we have in our beloved island state.


  25. Until they, the interchangeable governments in Barbados, make badly needed changes to the grossly overrated British system that is steeped in constitutional nonsense that they themselves most often are unable to translate………it will always be chaos and confusion in Barbados, those laws no longer suit the times you live in.

    The CJ should really be busying himself with unclogging the judiciary of all these decades old cases and let the CCJ handle these ‘unconstitutional’ matters……….the former CJ SImmons has done more than enough irreparable damage to the judiciary and that is what should be occupying GIbson, fixing that damage.


  26. William skinner

    You should go on the stage. Or are you there already?


  27. @William

    You are way off base. The KPI which we cannot lose sight is the state of justice in Barbados. The criticism of Gibson about his competence must be judge against a court which has not improved since his appointment.


  28. Well Well

    You have failed to accept the fact that the system of governance in Barbados, is an imperfect system with imperfect people operating within it. And it is not the system we need to overhaul completely, but there is an obvious need of transparency, accountability, answerability and the appropriate checks and balances; to bring the impropriety of its members under control.

  29. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    The Government got the man they wanted by going as far as amending the law to accommodate their handpicked person. Those of us who objected here on BU were vilified by a number of half and in some cases full idiots. Now the fowls have come home to roost: at least amused is decent enough to admit that he was wrong.

    By the way, the law was not amended with enough precision to qualify Sir Marston to be appointed as Chief Justice. He still did not qualify based on the amendment but we have a lawless Government and a population that is prepared to accept anything.


  30. DOmpey……..so why don’t you tell that to the DLP, telling me will not change things you know.


  31. @Pachamama | July 11, 2014 at 11:03 AM | As always, a pleasure to read your contributions, even when I sometimes disagree. Yes, you are right that many who have been exposed have somehow wriggled out of it. And it is shameful. I agree wholeheartedly with everything you have said.

    How do we solve it? How indeed. It seems to me that the solution lies in the hands lf the prosecuting and investigating authorities, namely the Police and the DPP. If they do their jobs as they are supposed to, then these people would be guests of Dodds. I assure you that these issues when the arise, or are exposed, are as offensive to lawyers as that are to most Bajans. That is the best I can offer.

    @Well Well | July 11, 2014 at 11:34 AM | . Agree for the most part. Take issue with one statement only in regard to the “British” system. Britain has not got a Constitution. It relies on a series of acts, starting with Magna Carat. The governing principal of British Constitutional Law lies in the existence of the monarchy and the power that this denies to the executive. I would think that the founders of our independence followed the American example of having a Constitution that requires 2/3rds of Parliament to change. In so doing, they were likely conscious of the fact that many sovereign independent nations might choose at some time to do away with the monarchy and it would seem to me that this was their way of providing a framework for checks and balances on absolute power, by putting in place a “rigid” constitution. “Constitutional” changes in Britain do not require a 2/3rds majority, merely a majority. I speak under correction, but I believe that the Barbados Constitution was mostly drafted by a Bajan. Sir Roy Marshall.

    @William skinner | July 11, 2014 at 11:14 AM | Thank you for the shopping list of what Marlton Gibson has NOT done. I wish to add to it “HIS JOB”. And he is NOT from St Andrews, but from Christ Church – you have clearly and scandalously confused him with that excellent and eminent jurist, Sleepy Smith. As for Gibson not giving up, it appears to me that he may have to choose between going and being pushed out for cause, which cause, by his letter, he has so obligingly provided..


  32. Hopefully we have learned our lesson and appoint a ne CJ who has worked continuously as a lawyer in Barbados.

    A person who works for years in the USA justice cannot be competent as a CJ in Barbados unless he is a genius with a photographic memory.


  33. Amused…….i am shocked, how did they manage to merge the english legal system with the American system, that was quite a feat. I vaguely remember the name Roy Marshall. If they were so hellbent on using the US system, they should have copied the 3 systems of government that dictates total transparency with checks and balances, not just the half-ass part that keeps everything bogged down for decades.

    The problem i have is with the stubbornness and determination of the DLP/BLP governments not to make changes to constitutional laws don’t care how destructive they have become to taxpayers, the politicians are not flexible enough as it pertains to changing laws to benefit the people, but quickly and in the middle of the night introduce laws to benefit themselves.


  34. Hants……trust me, you do not want another David Simmons in the judiciary of Barbados, they will never be able to undo what is happening there, maybe Gibson will read this and see the error of his ways and…………we can hope.


  35. Well Well
    What difference would it make to overhaul the entire system of governance in Barbados, when this in itself would do little to address the faults and failings conducive to humankind? It seems as though youโ€™re underestimating the inventive ingenuity of those selected group of people who are motived by the personal- interest rather than the collective interest? Now, even with a system of governance as perfect as that of the United States of America, there is still those group of people who dear to undermine the system, but more often than not, thanks to the CHECKS and BALANCES that cacompany the Republican System of Governance, there are caught and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The objective should be to rid the system of governance in Barbados, of the pervasive corruption which some here have spoken of, than it should function as it was intended.


  36. Well Well
    You ought to know that without the appropriate constraints ( Checks and Balances) to curtail manโ€™s passions ( Self – interest), the overall transformation of the system of government in Barbados would be to no avail. Listen! The passions of manโ€™s would not conform to the dictates of REASON and JUSTICE without some kind of CONSTRAINTS Well Well.


  37. Well Well

    The system should work as such: when you identify an area of corruption address it immediately. I know this may appear as though it is a reactionary measure, rather than a proactive response, but the system seems to be too cancerous at this stage of the game.


  38. The British constitution is unwritten. It is still a constitution. Its metes and bounds have been determined by statute, by case law and by custom.


  39. Of Simmons CJ “they will never undo what is happening there”….are you totally bananas?


  40. @ Amused
    But it is of little comfort in complaining to the devil about satan, LOL. Lawyers are part of a fraternity which includes prosecutors, the police, judges, magistrates, lodges, prison officials etc. On its face, your suggestion seems highly reasonable but as a practical matter it is destined to deliver more of the same, forever. There maybe a case for breaking out of this chronic dysfunction, national inbreeding. No amount of additional laws or regulations can kill the demons-at- large within the legal establishment. Our best judgement suggests that you are well aware of this. Do you really think it is, for example, inconceivable for attorneys, senior attorneys, and judges, who are sitting on matters in which there could be conflicts, in this small island, not to discuss and maybe decide matters outside the court?


  41. STOP THE WINING and except the fact the Barbados Judiciary is CORRUPT like most other Barbadian organizations, politicians etc.


  42. Well Well only a Bajan who has been successfully practising Law, i.e. a Lawyer/magistrate/ judge can be a competent CJ in Barbados.

    That is common sense.

    I will leave this debate to those who are netter educated than I am.


  43. @Well Well | July 11, 2014 at 1:15 PM | When I was reading law, it was the method of teaching, in independent countries like Barbados, to make a distinction between places that have a constitution, calling it a โ€œrigid constitutionโ€ and those that had no constitution, but relied on a series of acts or charters, like Magna Carta, the Petition of Rights, the Bill of Rights, the Act of Settlement and various Parliament Acts, as having a โ€œflexible constitutionโ€. However, if you ask legal practitioners in the UK, they will tell you that they do not have a constitution โ€“ and it is their country and their laws. Therefore, I am at a loss to understand how the UK and the US systems could have been โ€œmergedโ€. With respect, I agree with Domyet. Acts can be challenged if they are in contravention to the Constitution โ€“ and that is the check and balance. It is also peripherally what this present blog is about. The constitutionality or unconstitutionality of the Legal Professions Act. What the blog is principally about is the extra judicial act of the CJ that seeks to usurp the authority of the Government. I do agree with you about David Simmons.

    @Domyet. Excellent. Agree.

    @Dompey | July 11, 2014 at 1:53 PM | Likely you are right.


  44. The Chief Justice, the Central Bank Governor and the Prime Minister. Three men in a tub, rub-a- dub-dub. Send them out to sea, and pull out the bung.


  45. @ Amused. I wrote:”It reminds when the current Governor General was made a judge. Some of his colleagues were โ€œappalledโ€ that a โ€œbarefoot boy from St. Andrewโ€ (I think) could be elevated to such heights”
    I never said that the CJ was from St. Andrew ! I never confused anybody with Sir Frederick . I merely said that when the current Governor General(Sir Elliott Belgrave) Was made a high court judge they were some who questioned his background. I am quite aware of Sir Marston’s roots.
    We had a QC who exposed his ass to a female colleague and he is still there. We have a recently appointed white QC who used racial slurs in a confrontation with a black Barbadian; he is still there. We have lawyers who have stolen clients’ monies and they are still there.
    To date all the shots taken at Sir Marston are nothing more than the mouthings of those who think that he is a reachable target.I publicly challenge anybody on this blog or any other publication to prove that Sir Marston has done anything to undermine the justice system in Barbados or anywhere else.
    @ Caswell
    Politicians and or political parties getting the Chief Justice they want is nothing new. Your memory cannot possibly be that short.


  46. @William

    You continue to blurt nonsense by twisting the point that under Gibson’s watch the delivery of justice has gone further South. If this is used as a measure of performance we are correct to question competence. It is why we can’t address the system issues in Barbados, too much emotionalism.


  47. @ David
    What William is saying is that the CJ is an ordinary black Bajan who has not been convicted of anything – and hence should be left to enjoy his position.
    Don’t you understand that we have NO IDEA of what PRODUCTIVITY means…?
    …somehow, Bajans are able to divorce RESULTS from any job…
    …be it prime minister or NCC worker….

    …and we talking shiite bout a WTE plant?
    Wuh if Bizzy has to bring in a white Englishman to run his two-bit electrical operation ….who the hell will he bring to run this WTE plant?
    …a Russian / Israeli/ German….?
    …and Bushie is talking about the office cleaners yuh….!!!


  48. @William skinner | July 11, 2014 at 4:39 PM | “I publicly challenge anybody on this blog or any other publication to prove that Sir Marston has done anything to undermine the justice system in Barbados or anywhere else.”

    And, Mr Skinners, I publicly answer your challenge. By issuing a extra judicial statement on a matter on which he has no authority, Gibson has brought the judiciary into disrepute and that constitutes gross misconduct.

    @Bushie. You are on a roll.

    @Pachamama, Apologies for not responding to your earlier comment. I will do so later.


  49. Amused……..as i said the new CJ should really concern himself with the backlog that is bringing the judiciary into ill-repute and chasing away international investors by the droves because it’s known that corruption has entered that institution and it is now at a standstill…….i do not see where he should concern himself with matters pertaining to the attorneys unless it’s helping in their disbarment and disciplining when they steal from clients, something we all know David Simmons refused to do, he allowed the lawyers to commit crimes for years, those lawyers who were so inclined, cause he himself is/was no better…from what i am hearing from those concerned the CJ should also be more concerned about the Judges who keep adjourning cases instead of bringing closure to these cases, the island is too small to be adjourning cases for 3, 4, 6 and 8 months, there must be something he can do about them since i am sure the judges collect their salaries from the taxpayer’s purses every month without fail and as it seems with very little conscience, yet it appears they are refusing to do their jobs. There must be something the CJ can do to bring things under control…these judges should not be a law unto themselves.

    I tend to agree with you and also Dompey, though i wish he would express his concerns to the DLP government of which it appears he’s a member…..maybe they will listen to him and make the required changes that he is suggesting.

    Regarding the constitutional laws that needs to be changed and/or addressed, I thought that was what the parliament was for regardless if they copied some constitutional laws from the magna carta or from the US justice system…….there seems to be a lot of gray areas….I honestly thought that since there is now a CCJ that these types of cases would be presented to the CCJ particularly since they move faster than the judiciary in Barbados and would be more balanced in their judgements unlike what i am hearing about the Judges in Barbados, sad and sorry to say.

    By the way word around is that since PM Stuart gave his girlfriend Michelle Weekes a Judgeship it is not sitting well with some of the other Judges because their are many more people more qualified and deserving, that is no excuse for Judges to bring mental anguish and torment to defendants and plaintiffs who seek closure of their cases by allowing them to prolong in the system for years, in saying that, Stuart claims he is honest and upright so what the hell is he doing making an already ugly situation in the judiciary much worse.

    William…….I understand from one source that CJ Gibson is trying his best but there are forces in the judiciary and both DLP/BLP fighting him all the way. In my opinion he needs to try harder even if it means finding a way to fire some of the Judges who are being unfair to the taxpayers, particularly the ones who are now helping the insurance companies clog up the court system further.


  50. @Bush Tea

    Correct.

    A culture of meritocracy and productivity, what a thing!

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