Justitia is most often depicted with a set of scales typically suspended from her left hand, upon which she measures the strengths of a case's support and opposition. She is also often seen carrying a double-edged sword in her right hand, symbolizing the power of Reason and Justice, which may be wielded either for or against any party. Since the 15th century, Lady Justice has often been depicted wearing a blindfold. The blindfold represents objectivity, in that justice is or should be meted out objectively, without fear or favor, regardless of identity, money, power, or weakness; blind justice and impartiality.
Lady Justice and I have been watching with some concern certain development in Barbados over the past weeks. There is a growing sense of unease in my mind as I believe our leaders are setting a dangerous precedent by not sending a consistent message of right and wrong. The scales of justice appears to be becoming unbalanced.
Firstly, the issue of Keisha Brathwaite who illegally took up residence in an unoccupied house owned by the National Housing Corporation (NHC) at Barbarees Hill, St Michael. No one questions that she was in a dire situation being pregnant and with two young children to care for and being faced with the situation of having no roof over her head. But, does this justify her breaking the law?
She has garnished much public sympathy but I ask; "How many of those offering her support would have done so if she had broken into their homes to steal food for her children?"
Minister of Housing Michael Lashley offered his opinion early, (before public opinion was known). He stated:-
Anyone who illegally occupies Government housing will “feel the full weight of the law”.
"This is a serious matter and the National Housing Corporation, as the property owner and the agent of the Crown, will asserts its rights shortly; and I am giving full notice to those person who believe they can go into housing units and all will be well. I am sending a warning to those who feel they can break the law".
"This impacts on the rule of the law and if we allow it, people will go and break into NHC units and decide that they can settle in them, that will be sending the wrong signal. It cannot happen under my tenure as minister,we will be taking action shortly. We have to assert our rights and will do so through the legal process.”
However, two weeks later, Ms. Brathwaite moved her bed out of the unit in Barbarees Hill, St Michael and handed over the keys to NHC officials only after NHC officials had found her a unit in The Pine, St Michael. And the Welfare Department having given the assurance that they will pay the rent!
She broke and entered the property of the crown, illegally occupied said property and only vacated the premises when she was assured that she would be given, rent free, similar or better accommodation! Mr. Lashley, how is this, in your own words, “sending a warning to those who feel they can break the law". I will be surprised if the hundreds of people waiting on NHC units are not thinking at this very moment that they too should find an empty NHC unit and move in.
Do you see what I am saying about sending the wrong signals?
Lady Justice maybe wearing a blindfold but the people are not. Rewarding wrongdoing is tantamount to aiding and abetting lawlessness. I think the Commissioner of Police need to consider charging the officials of the NHC as accessories to or for the criminal facilitation of the actus reus in this case.
Secondly, the story of the ten Barbadian fishermen held in Trinidad & Tobago for fishing illegally.
Mr. Brathwaite you are an Attorney-at-Law specializing in corporate and international law. A man well respected in your field. I ask you; "What message are we sending?"
Is it o.k to break the law as long as it is not a popular one?
Or, are other people’s laws to be ignored if we don’t agree with them?
I am not dispassionate to the plight of our fishermen. I feel their pain at having been let down by successive Governments since 1990 over the issue of formalizing an agreement with our neighbour with regards to fishing. This issue should have been concluded long ago over a bottle of Blue Label,after a Caricom Heads of Government meeting, like many other issues in the past. Like you Mr. Brathwaite I grew up in St. Philip. My grandfather was Senior Lighthouse Keeper at Ragged Point Lighthouse and for most of my childhood the sea was the last thing I heard when I fell asleep at night and the first thing when I awoke in the morning. As children we knew by sight every fishing boat out of Skeetes Bay and each of us adopted a boat which we called our own and rejoiced when it was the first back to port in the afternoon, because, to our minds this meant that they had caught the most fish first. As an adult I spent many a memorable Sunday morning going out for a few hours with Evy on his boat out of Weston, St. James. We will catch a few dozen flying fish and maybe a couple of “dolphin” and be back before lunch time.
I am not dispassionate to the plight of our fishermen. I feel their pain at having been let down by successive Governments since 1990 over the issue of formalizing an agreement with our neighbour with regards to fishing. This issue should have been concluded long ago over a bottle of Blue Label,after a Caricom Heads of Government meeting, like many other issues in the past. Like you Mr. Brathwaite I grew up in St. Philip. My grandfather was Senior Lighthouse Keeper at Ragged Point Lighthouse and for most of my childhood the sea was the last thing I heard when I fell asleep at night and the first thing when I awoke in the morning. As children we knew by sight every fishing boat out of Skeetes Bay and each of us adopted a boat which we called our own and rejoiced when it was the first back to port in the afternoon, because, to our minds this meant that they had caught the most fish first. As an adult I spent many a memorable Sunday morning going out for a few hours with Evy on his boat out of Weston, St. James. We will catch a few dozen flying fish and maybe a couple of “dolphin” and be back before lunch time.
However, we cannot condone the breaking of the laws of our neighbouring countries by our citizens. We ignore at our peril, the negative effect on our national psyche that such perceived moral contradictions by our leaders will have on a populace under the strain of current economic challenges. Are we then to be surprised that the number of home invasions are on the increase and becoming more violent? Where there is no respect for the rule of law as relating to other people’s property, there will be anarchy.
Finally let me say my piece on the case of Johan Bjerkhamn currently being conducted in our courts.
The tragedy that resulted in the death of Bjerkhamn’s 11 year old son Luke over a year ago is still fresh in the minds of most Barbadians. A number of issues surrounding this case are of interest to me.
Early on in the case. it was pretty obvious from the little information available that the Director of Public Prosecutions, (DPP), would have found it difficult to charge the young Bjerkhamn with anything more that vast stupidity and this has subsequently been confirmed by the DPP. On the 02 december 2011, in the Holetown Magistrate Court, both DPP Charles Leacock, QC, and leader of the defence team, Queen’s Counsel Sir Richard Cheltenham, supported the idea of a non-custodial sentence for Bjerkhamn, with court-imposed supervision and community service. The DPP, in an earlier court appearance, had announced withdrawal of the manslaughter charge against Bjerkhamn, saying there was no evidence pointing to reckless endangering of life or gross negligence that would substantiate it. Bjerkhamn faces a lesser charge that he “willfully exposed” a child in his custody “in a manner likely to cause injury to his health”.
In the year 2011, the maximum penalty the law provides for this crime which resulted in the untimely death of a child, (the ultimate “injury to his health”), is a fine of just Bds$24.00. If the circumstances were not so tragic this would be laughable. And when you factor in the financial resources of the accused the farce is exacerbated beyond belief.
Who is responsible for updating these laws and penalties? It is obvious that a number of people charged with this responsibility over the years have failed to keep our judicial system up to date. A modern prison and a high tech Judicial Centre is a joke if laws like this still remain on our books in their present state.
My second question is, Why did it take a year for the DPP to decide that the manslaughter case against Mr Bjerkhamn had no merit? Fortunately for Mr. Bjerkham, he could afford the best legal council available in Barbados so he did not have to spend a year at Dodds on remand waiting for the DPP to decide his fate. If Mr. Bjerkhamn was like most of us and could not afford Sir Richard Cheltenham and Andrew Pilgrim, and was not able to meet the requirements of court sureties, he would have been on remand for nearly a year. This raises the question; How many prisoners are tax payers currently paying for on remand at Dodds for frivolous offenses that they cannot possibly be found guilty of, only because they don’t have the financial resources of a Johan Bjerkhamn?
Furthermore, I cannot help but wonder if the public’s perception that there is one law for the rich and another for the poor, was a factor in the DPP’s delay in these proceedings. Maybe his reluctance to admit in a timely manner that this case had no merit was as a result of his not wanting to appear reluctant to prosecute a “rich white boy”. Maybe Lady Justice is not so blind.
On 21 December 2011, Magistrate Barbara Cooke-Alleyne will make her ruling in the case against Johan Bjerkhamn in the Holetown Magistrate Court. I have known Mrs Cooke-Alleyne for over 35 years, (she too knows what is to go to sleep and awake to the sound of the waves breaking at Ragged Point), and I know that she will try her best to administer a sentence that reflects the tragedy of a young life lost while staying within the parameters of an outdated law. Lets hope that she don't fine him $24.00.
The tragedy that resulted in the death of Bjerkhamn’s 11 year old son Luke over a year ago is still fresh in the minds of most Barbadians. A number of issues surrounding this case are of interest to me.
Early on in the case. it was pretty obvious from the little information available that the Director of Public Prosecutions, (DPP), would have found it difficult to charge the young Bjerkhamn with anything more that vast stupidity and this has subsequently been confirmed by the DPP. On the 02 december 2011, in the Holetown Magistrate Court, both DPP Charles Leacock, QC, and leader of the defence team, Queen’s Counsel Sir Richard Cheltenham, supported the idea of a non-custodial sentence for Bjerkhamn, with court-imposed supervision and community service. The DPP, in an earlier court appearance, had announced withdrawal of the manslaughter charge against Bjerkhamn, saying there was no evidence pointing to reckless endangering of life or gross negligence that would substantiate it. Bjerkhamn faces a lesser charge that he “willfully exposed” a child in his custody “in a manner likely to cause injury to his health”.
In the year 2011, the maximum penalty the law provides for this crime which resulted in the untimely death of a child, (the ultimate “injury to his health”), is a fine of just Bds$24.00. If the circumstances were not so tragic this would be laughable. And when you factor in the financial resources of the accused the farce is exacerbated beyond belief.
Who is responsible for updating these laws and penalties? It is obvious that a number of people charged with this responsibility over the years have failed to keep our judicial system up to date. A modern prison and a high tech Judicial Centre is a joke if laws like this still remain on our books in their present state.
My second question is, Why did it take a year for the DPP to decide that the manslaughter case against Mr Bjerkhamn had no merit? Fortunately for Mr. Bjerkham, he could afford the best legal council available in Barbados so he did not have to spend a year at Dodds on remand waiting for the DPP to decide his fate. If Mr. Bjerkhamn was like most of us and could not afford Sir Richard Cheltenham and Andrew Pilgrim, and was not able to meet the requirements of court sureties, he would have been on remand for nearly a year. This raises the question; How many prisoners are tax payers currently paying for on remand at Dodds for frivolous offenses that they cannot possibly be found guilty of, only because they don’t have the financial resources of a Johan Bjerkhamn?
Furthermore, I cannot help but wonder if the public’s perception that there is one law for the rich and another for the poor, was a factor in the DPP’s delay in these proceedings. Maybe his reluctance to admit in a timely manner that this case had no merit was as a result of his not wanting to appear reluctant to prosecute a “rich white boy”. Maybe Lady Justice is not so blind.
On 21 December 2011, Magistrate Barbara Cooke-Alleyne will make her ruling in the case against Johan Bjerkhamn in the Holetown Magistrate Court. I have known Mrs Cooke-Alleyne for over 35 years, (she too knows what is to go to sleep and awake to the sound of the waves breaking at Ragged Point), and I know that she will try her best to administer a sentence that reflects the tragedy of a young life lost while staying within the parameters of an outdated law. Lets hope that she don't fine him $24.00.
In closing I will leave you with these thoughts:-
No comments:
Post a Comment