Support Village Voice News With a Donation of Your Choice.
A few years ago, I was critical of a decision that Justice B.S. Roy handed down. The matter involved a businessman who happened to be in the court compound.
I suggested that the judge could have called the businessman so that he could have had a say before any decision could be handed down. I was nearly jailed for contempt.
I was sitting in office when my telephone rang. A clerk from Justice Roy’s office was calling. He told me that the judge wanted to see me. The call appeared to be just an invitation. Back then I was often invited by many people for one reason or the other.
There appeared to be no immediacy so I informed the clerk that I would meet with the judge during the afternoon. I distinctly remembered that it was a Thursday.
So I went to the High Court to meet with Justice B.S. Roy. The clerk invited me to have a seat in the court that was empty at the time. No matter was in progress.
It wasn’t long before the judge made his appearance, took his seat at the raised platform with the podium and proceeded to call the court to order. I was stunned. The clerk duly informed me that I was before the court for contempt.
I had no lawyer. There was only me. So I duly informed Justice Roy that I was unprepared for a trial. He then told me to return the following day with a lawyer.
I heard many things that day when I explained what happened. One lawyer said that I could only be cited for contempt if I had done something within the confines of the court or the compound.
I am no lawyer but what I did know was that there was no appeal against a sentence for contempt. Whatever the negative outcome, the judge’s decision was final.
To make a long story short I was first represented by a visiting Trinidadian lawyer. The lawyer raised some interesting challenges all of which angered Justice Roy. I saw the beginning of a jail sentence.
Khemraj Ramjattan then moved in to represent me on the Monday. By then the news had reached the media. I had written the story of my contempt charge.
Kaieteur News publisher Glenn Lall was in my corner. He spoke to some of the people in the court including the then Chief Justice Carl Singh. It must have been that a lot of people wanted to see me in jail.
That Monday some reporters turned up. Justice Roy immediately issued a gag order. None was to write any story. The matter ended with me having to write an article stating that I meant no disrespect for the court.
I had gone back to court with soap, a towel, toothbrush and the bare necessities that day. My daughter who has since migrated began to cry. I told her to treat my incarceration as a brief vacation. But deep inside I was scared.
The funny thing is that the incident came back to me vividly when I heard Bharrat Jagdeo and Anil Nandlall criticise the decision by Justice Sandil Kissoon.
None of them has been cited for contempt. Is it that political officers hold certain powers? Does political office allow someone to disrespect a judge? I have seen that. One ultra-patriotic member of the People’s Progressive Party actually called on President Irfaan Ali to sack two judges who ruled against the government.
But I suppose such is the nature of life in Guyana. One set of people would report an incident to the police and get no response. Another set just has to sniff and the police would institute charges against the perceived offender.
It is reflective of Animal Farm. All animals are equal but some are more equal than others. In Guyana the saying is One Guyana but as in the case of Animal Farm, some are more equal than the other.
That is only one side of the coin. The decision by Justice Kissoon was based on the clauses written into the agreement by the government. Exxon was found to have breached the clause hence the judge’s ruling.
So we have the case of the government objecting to a decision supporting it. Madness. It could be that the appeal is against the ruling that the judge has found that every Guyanese has a right to challenge Exxon.
Attorney General Anil Nandlall had held that the ordinary man had no locus standi in matters pertaining to the oil sector. That, too, appears to be dictatorial.
If it is only the government that can question Exxon, then there is the argument that if the government and Exxon are in bed there will be no questions.
The first private citizen to challenge the actions by Exxon was Glenn Lall. He was not successful on some legal technicality. Others have prevailed and this may be the fear that the government has.
Full parent company coverage offers protection to Guyana in the event of an oil spill. A spill would send oil to Trinidad, Venezuela, Grenada and some of the smaller islands.
Guyana would be in no position to compensate those countries for the loss of marine resources. In fact, the cleanup cost in those countries would be horrendous.
But one can only suppose that the government is so optimistic that it firmly believes that there would be no spill. If that is the case, then no need to worry about the insistence on the parent company guarantee.
So why appeal a most favourable decision?
