I HAVEN’T done the research and I am only going by memory, but I think since the late 1980s, no High Court or Court of Appeal judge has been removed. The last was under the presidency of Desmond Hoyte in the late 1980s. Based on a complaint by magistrate Claudette La Benette against Justice Kenneth Barnwell, a judicial panel was set up and it recommended the removal of Judge Barnwell.

That was a long time ago. Since that time, Cabinet members, opposition legislators, senior security officers and other categories of public officials have faced adverse criticism by way of accusations by members of society. Some of them have been sanctioned. In Guyana today, judges seem to be immune from two processes – accountability and discipline.

We have finally reached a stage in this country where the vacancies to fill positions on the bench will be advertised. But this can be a deception in transparency. The Judicial Service Commission should publicise the names of the applicants so the country could know who it is getting.

A judge is too powerful a person, with jurisdiction that may exceed even legislators and prime ministers and presidents. No two examples are more potent than the ones I will offer now. First, is the ruling of Justice Sandil Kissoon that ExxonMobil must take out unlimited insurance in the event of an oil spill, failure of which the EPA is directed to withdraw its environmental licence.

If Exxon did not get a stay of that judgement and was uncomfortable with unlimited insurance, then it had to cease operation, thus bringing to an end the largest foreign investment in Guyana.

In my opinion, a foreign investor should only be cited if he/she/it violates the laws and constitution of the country. Outside of that, stopping a foreign investment should be the jurisdiction of elected legislators.

The second one relates to a judge suing a columnist over the nature of a criminal sentence. I was that columnist. In all cases, I repeat all cases around the world, the columnist or journalist or editor is sued along with the media house. In this case, the newspaper was not sued. I later found out why but will only reveal that story to the Judicial Service Commission now that it has been constituted.

I took the writ to several lawyers that I consider friends and people I know would come to my rescue if I am hospitalised or need financial assistance. They all expressed fear of taking the case because they told me it could affect their clients who have to go in front of that judge should the judge lose the case. I was desperate because I could not secure legal assistance.
I eventually got a lawyer who lives abroad to take the case after three lawyers drafted my defence and asked that they not be named. The foreign based lawyer agreed to accept the case because he would use zoom facilities. I was lucky, and extremely so because when the matter came up before another High Court judge, the court declined to hear the case. Normally in any part of the world, judges do not sue if they feel offended. They charge you with contempt of court and ask you to explain yourself.

It has to be a frightening experience for a judge to sue a member of the media and no lawyer in the country wants to take the case because they are afraid of future victimisation if they should win against the suing judge.

This particular case highlights the need for the judiciary to publish a guideline for the conduct of judges and the stipulation that judges should be above the fray and not sue the press. The definitive case in this context is a 1930 decision in Trinidad – Ambard versus the Attorney-General in which the editor of the Port-of-Spain Gazette was sued by a judge.

Once the applications meet the deadline, the applicants should be identified so members of society can have an opportunity to present a case against a lawyer or judge, where the facts support the ineligibility of that person to sit on the High Court or be promoted to a higher court.

It would help the panel and the judiciary and the country as a whole if facts can be cited about a lawyer or judge whose conduct is unbecoming. Let us offer some hypothetical examples – does Guyana want a judge who gets into public physical confrontations, threaten teachers of the school his/her children go to, demand money from journalists or editors or columnists or else they would sue. The judiciary could preserve its credibility if these things are brought out before an appointment is made.