This week the Prime Minister of Barbados Freundel Stuart deign to address an issue which has been of concern to many Barbadians. It is an open secret David Comissiong’s challenge of the decision to grant approval to Mark Maloney of Vision Development Inc to build the Hyatt Centric Resort on Bay Street reported to cost USD100 million has rubbed the Barbados government the wrong way. Minister Denis Kellman has declared Comissiong an enemy of the state. Minister Donville Inniss has dived in with his usual rhetoric by stating he would, if he had the time, stand in protest outside David Comissiong’s place of work. It is ironic to note that our laws support Kellman’s labelling of Comissiong as an enemy of the statement as well as Inniss’ bluster to protest outside Comissiong’s office.
Prime Minister Stuart’s response to the Hyatt issue is interesting. He seems to be of the view that citizen advocate David Comissiong’s application for a judicial review is not supported by the law. We say to Stuart if he believes such is the case why not let the Court decide where the matter has been delayed a hearing because of the unavailability of the judge? In the matter of Michael Carrington withholding clients funds from a client your response was to advise him to seek redress in the form of acquiring legal counsel. Why not be consistent and allow the legal apparatus to work for Comissiong who has followed the advice you gave to Michael Carrington who stole- or more euphemistically- withheld $244,000 dollars from a wheelchair bound septuagenarian?
BU’s position is a matter of public record. The attack on citizen advocate David Comissiong’s right to access the laws of Barbados by members of the Cabinet of Barbados is the issue BU will steadfastly defend. In fact, we go further to question why the large cadre of lawyers registered to operate in Barbados have up to now avoided the opportunity their training affords them to be ideal citizen advocates. In a democracy it is critical for citizens to organize to pressure the “establishment” and to date the legal fraternity has been delinquent as a group.
The position prime minster Stuart has taken to question the legal grounding of Comissiong’s judicial review application was made the more interesting by a recent decision handed down by Privy Council of England in the matter originating from Trinidad & Tobago Reginald Dumas v Police Service Commission on the right of the High Court to hear an application by a citizen to interpret a provision of the Constitution. The gist of the Privy Council’s decision is that there is merit under the law to entertain an application from a citizen if it was deemed in the public interest.
What does the Barbados law support Mr. Prime Minister?
We note that you have not quoted any law to support your position and until you do it will be punished with laughter by onlookers. It must gnaw at your innards that Comissiong wrestled the amendment to the Immigration (Biometrics) Regulation 2015 to the ground and he now has the Hyatt project in his sight. The pressure you and members of the government must be absorbing from those who are demanding a return on the 2013 campaign financing contribution must dig deep.
Here is the link to the Reginald Dumas v Police Service Commission report – Appointments to Police Service Commission …DUMAS WINS AT PRIVY COUNCIL
Leave a Reply to Well Well & Consequences Observing BloggerCancel reply