Categorized | Editorial, Local

There is obviously no intention to encourage ‘doing the right thing’

Editorial – November 15, 2013

It cannot be easy to believe that our administration particularly our political leaders do anything that directly disenfranchises the people of this island, politically, socially, economically or otherwise. Yet in recent times, it is uncertain how to describe the kind of attitude that seems be worse than what one can think of for a terminally ill patient.

It is that bad. When our Government (local or otherwise) seeks to employ someone under the following terms, who or what are they protecting? They seek a legal adviser, “To assist the Attorney General and GOM to present evidence that will variously win cases as defendants and/or reduce awards of damages, costs and interest against Government.

“As a consequence, to indirectly help GOM deter the growing practice of initiating litigation against Government in the hope of making money.”

The background given is: “Over the last few years, there has been significant growth in the number and potential size (in terms of damages claimed) of legal cases initiated against GOM. These range over a number of areas including land matters, contracts and personnel issues in the public service.”

Instead of protecting people from abuse and injustice, they are seeking how to prevent them from obtaining justice and fairness. And, in fact, it is difficult to figure out, the growing practice, except that they have indicated the unwillingness to do the right thing.

The question should be asked why?  If the answer is indeed that people are trying to make easy money, then the other question should be, why do they have the need to? That will show up another awful weakness of Montserrat, lack of work and an economy that cannot support people it now has.

How can it be disadvantageous to government when anyone is wronged that he seeks to put it right. They encourage that. However, it should be noted here, that no one takes the Government to court without seeking to settle matter. It is never anyone’s first line of action.

What can the Government possibly introduce, what action can the Government take to be able to get the court to go against the laws of a democratic country? Or, are they ready to take steps to be more undemocratic than we have complained about? Are they saying that the courts are not meting out justice by giving judgment in favour of complainants? This action is almost if it is not already, contemptuous.

When the 2010 Constitution came into force, His Excellency Governor Davis, when we pointed out that something should be done to deter public servants carrying out actions, whether negligently or wilfully, that cause the Government to pay, he warned that the Constitution would help people become more aware of their rights to seek redress.

The action of not doing the right thing as they seem to do so frequently, forces people to take action and when it reaches the courts, if they uphold the law, justice will prevail and that is their duty.

The new magistrate, Mr. Robert A. Shuster gave the feature address at the recent passing out parade of five new police officers last week. He spoke on the topic, ‘The Rule of Law. He told a small cross section of people with mostly police officers, “Public servants including police officers must be committed to the principles of democracy and fairness, fairness to all people. The laws of democracy have included many sources, written Constitutions, common law statutes, regulations, religious and ethical teachings, cultural traditions and practices.”

These he said, “Enshrine certain provisions to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens – equal protection of all people the law must be uniquely appied to any single individual or group of individuals.”

He briefed as to how the Rule of Law, came about and said, “To get away from the tyranny of rule of the gun… is the notion of rule by law including the notion that the ruler should always rule under the law and that the ruler is by virtue of all legal means.

“Establishing what known as the rule by law. It Protecs a persons fundamental, political, social and economical rights,  and serves to remind us all that tyranny and lawlessness are not alternatives and are not acceptable to anyone.”

If our leaders and legislators have difficulty understanding the foregoing, they shouldn’t even try to, but leave and show that they have a modicum of integrity and decency, as the foregoing calls for.

Leave a Reply

Newsletter

Archives

Editorial – November 15, 2013

It cannot be easy to believe that our administration particularly our political leaders do anything that directly disenfranchises the people of this island, politically, socially, economically or otherwise. Yet in recent times, it is uncertain how to describe the kind of attitude that seems be worse than what one can think of for a terminally ill patient.

It is that bad. When our Government (local or otherwise) seeks to employ someone under the following terms, who or what are they protecting? They seek a legal adviser, “To assist the Attorney General and GOM to present evidence that will variously win cases as defendants and/or reduce awards of damages, costs and interest against Government.

Insert Ads Here

“As a consequence, to indirectly help GOM deter the growing practice of initiating litigation against Government in the hope of making money.”

The background given is: “Over the last few years, there has been significant growth in the number and potential size (in terms of damages claimed) of legal cases initiated against GOM. These range over a number of areas including land matters, contracts and personnel issues in the public service.”

Instead of protecting people from abuse and injustice, they are seeking how to prevent them from obtaining justice and fairness. And, in fact, it is difficult to figure out, the growing practice, except that they have indicated the unwillingness to do the right thing.

The question should be asked why?  If the answer is indeed that people are trying to make easy money, then the other question should be, why do they have the need to? That will show up another awful weakness of Montserrat, lack of work and an economy that cannot support people it now has.

How can it be disadvantageous to government when anyone is wronged that he seeks to put it right. They encourage that. However, it should be noted here, that no one takes the Government to court without seeking to settle matter. It is never anyone’s first line of action.

What can the Government possibly introduce, what action can the Government take to be able to get the court to go against the laws of a democratic country? Or, are they ready to take steps to be more undemocratic than we have complained about? Are they saying that the courts are not meting out justice by giving judgment in favour of complainants? This action is almost if it is not already, contemptuous.

When the 2010 Constitution came into force, His Excellency Governor Davis, when we pointed out that something should be done to deter public servants carrying out actions, whether negligently or wilfully, that cause the Government to pay, he warned that the Constitution would help people become more aware of their rights to seek redress.

The action of not doing the right thing as they seem to do so frequently, forces people to take action and when it reaches the courts, if they uphold the law, justice will prevail and that is their duty.

The new magistrate, Mr. Robert A. Shuster gave the feature address at the recent passing out parade of five new police officers last week. He spoke on the topic, ‘The Rule of Law. He told a small cross section of people with mostly police officers, “Public servants including police officers must be committed to the principles of democracy and fairness, fairness to all people. The laws of democracy have included many sources, written Constitutions, common law statutes, regulations, religious and ethical teachings, cultural traditions and practices.”

These he said, “Enshrine certain provisions to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens – equal protection of all people the law must be uniquely appied to any single individual or group of individuals.”

He briefed as to how the Rule of Law, came about and said, “To get away from the tyranny of rule of the gun… is the notion of rule by law including the notion that the ruler should always rule under the law and that the ruler is by virtue of all legal means.

“Establishing what known as the rule by law. It Protecs a persons fundamental, political, social and economical rights,  and serves to remind us all that tyranny and lawlessness are not alternatives and are not acceptable to anyone.”

If our leaders and legislators have difficulty understanding the foregoing, they shouldn’t even try to, but leave and show that they have a modicum of integrity and decency, as the foregoing calls for.