Chief Justice Ivor Archie will have to wait until Tuesday to learn if the Law Association will be barred from continuing its investigation into allegation of misconduct levelled against him.
High Court Judge Nadia Kangaloo reserved her decision yesterday, as she said she needed time to consider the lengthy submissions presented by attorneys for Archie and the association in the Port-of-Spain High Court.
In his judicial review lawsuit and corresponding injunction application, Archie is contending the association does not have any power under the Legal Profession Act to investigate him, as such power lies in Section 137 of the Constitution. Under Section 137, the President appoints a tribunal after misconduct allegations against a CJ are referred by the Prime Minister. The tribunal, which includes a chairman and at least two other members, all with judicial experience in Commonwealth jurisdictions, will investigate and then make recommendations.
Presenting submissions on Archie’s behalf yesterday, Ian Benjamin claimed the association’s approach was misguided.
“Parliament gave you the power to look at lawyers not judges,” Benjamin said.
He also accused the association of being biased based on the no confidence motion it passed against Archie and members of the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (JLSC), over their handling of the short-lived judicial appointment of former chief magistrate Marcia Ayers-Caesar in June last year.
“They have not been treating us fairly since,” Benjamin said.
He also claimed the investigation was unfair, as Archie was never provided with the association’s report on the allegations it is investigating when he was asked to respond.
In response, the association’s lawyer Christopher Hamel-Smith said the association was allowed to scrutinise Archie’s conduct like any other citizen.
“If we are unable to look up at judges and analyse their conduct, then we do not live in the democratic society we were promised in the Constitution,” Hamel-Smith said.
While he admitted Section 137 provided the only avenue to bring disciplinary proceedings against Archie, he noted that the association’s investigation was simply to determine if the allegations were sufficient to refer them to the Prime Minister to trigger the impeachment process.
“It is the responsible thing for the association to do what it can to ascertain the facts related to the allegations,” Hamel-Smith said, as he pointed out the association may conclude the allegations against Archie were without merit.
Archie sat to the side of his legal team throughout the hearing, was seen gesticulating at them whenever he felt they needed to clarify or emphasise a a point, or object to a statement made the association’s legal team.
Archie is also being represented by John Jeremie, SC, Kerwyn Garcia and Keith Scotland, while the association is also being represented by Jason Mootoo, Rishi Dass and Robin Otway.
ALLEGATIONS AGAINST ARCHIE
The controversy surrounding Archie arose late last year after a series of media reports which accused Archie of attempting to persuade the judges to change their State-provided security in favour of a private company in which his friend and convicted fraudster Dillian Johnson worked. Archie was also accused of attempting to fast track Housing Development Corporation (HDC) applications for persons. Archie only responded to the allegations once, where he denied discussing judges’ security but admitted to suggesting persons for HDC housing.
In November last year, Council of the Law Association called on Archie to respond to the allegations. But Archie has repeated refused the association’s request to directly respond to the allegations.
The association’s council has since appointed a sub-committee to investigate the allegations and sought the legal advice of two eminent Queen’s Counsel to determine if the allegations are sufficient to trigger impeachment proceedings under S137 of the Constitution.
Dr. Francis Alexis, QC, of Grenada and Eamon Courtenay, QC, of Belize, received the investigative report last week and are expected to deliver their advice, which would be relayed to the association’s membership at a special general meeting. In the event that Archie is refused an injunction, the meeting is expected to be held at Queen’s Hall, St Ann’s, on March 15.