Sat Sharma to be Charged
News coming out of London this morning is that the Privy Council has ruled against Chief Justice Satnarine Sharma. The Privy Council who heard the case over two days in early October delivered the judgment only this morning sometime after 6am T&T time.
 |
| Sat Sharma |
In their ruling they confirm the decision of the Court of Appeal that paved the way for Sharma to be arrested on criminal charges alleging that he attempted to sway the decision of Chief Magistrate Sherman Mc Nicolls in the case against former prime minister Basdeo Panday. They even went as far as to say that the Judicial review that Sat Sharma applied for should not have been permitted as Judicial Reviews are not granted for cases such as those.
However the Privy Council Added that they cast no aspersions on the character of the man who is to be presumed innocent till proven guilty.
Now I don’t know what any of this means, but it doesn’t sound too good for the Chief Justice. In fact it sounds like this clears the way for the Chief Justice to be charged.
However you may feel about the CJ’s guilt or innocence, or the PNM or UNC for that matter, it’s still a sad day in T&T - not because I don’t think he should be charged, but because it’s just another sign that our Judiciary is in trouble. And surely by the time this trial is over, our legal system would have already taken a massive hit.
This blasted news just brings me down from my 10% inflation euphoria.
*Addendum
(1:47pm) - Reports are that in the company of his wife, lawyer and two plainclothes fraud squad officers, the Chief Justice has surrendered to the Fraud Squad. Details are still a little sketchy though.
(4:00pm) - The CJ appeared before a magistrate charged with attempting to pervert the course of public justice. He was in court for about 10 minutes and was granted $250,000 bail.
21 Responses to “Sat Sharma to be Charged”
By Hottie Hottie on Nov 30, 2006 | Reply
I waiting for your anonymous bloggers aka the Panday parade.
By No Longer Anon on Nov 30, 2006 | Reply
I myself waiting to hear what people have to say.
I don’t know why everyone thinks everything is politically motivated.
Not because you are CJ or a former PM makes you above the law and exempt from prosecution. As a matter of fact, I believe these people should be leading by example.
NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.
(I feel very strongly about this)
By Mani on Nov 30, 2006 | Reply
Hottie, yuh mean “but u serious”? Nah he cyah tell me nothing till he answers a few questions I asked him.
no longer anon, I agree, no one is above the law. I just wish that this does minimal damage to our country.
By Mani on Nov 30, 2006 | Reply
But no longer anon, I wonder if Patos feels the same way about that? If he could come and tell Sharma “resign or be charged” isn’t that very telling that he thinks some people are above the law? If anyone commits a crime they should be charged right? Anybody ever hear a police tell a bandit, “put down the gun or be charged”? Whether or not he puts the gun down he’ll be charged. So why does Patos give Sharma that escape?
By boysieringo on Nov 30, 2006 | Reply
Mani boy yuh ain’t play yuh have a future in politics. Well the pnm-till-ah-dead must be feteing in st. james. I’ll hold him innocent until proven otherwise. Also it’s going to be hard to “dutty” his character as was proven with Justice Stanley John. Hoping we can be progressive and let the system do it’s job but I’m also hoping mas goes back to de savannah!
By Mani on Dec 1, 2006 | Reply
Oh gosh nah boy…not me and that. Well I wouldn’t mind “getting involved” to help my country, but running for seat and thing, and knowing I have to sit int he same house with people like Bas and Larry Achong, no thanks.
I just want whatever’s left of our justice system to get together one last time.
By ed on Dec 1, 2006 | Reply
And of course he’s not going to resign. Gotta hold on to being a big fish in a small pond, I guess.
(Note that I have no opinion on his guilt. I just think that a Chief Justice who is on trial for perversion of justice should have the decency to step aside, even temporarily.)
By no longer anon on Dec 1, 2006 | Reply
Exactly Mani. Uncle Patos should never have given Mr. Sharma that option….resign or be charged?…craziness.
So, the police should really tell them tief, “return the goods allyuh tief, or we go charge allyuh”. ANd then they (d tief) should go staright to the privy council and appeal the decision.
I mean what madness is this?
That is why there is a court of law…so you can be tried, and found innocent or guilty by your peers.
Or is it that the CJ thinks he is above us regular folk? and that we are not worthy to judge him?
By boysieringo on Dec 1, 2006 | Reply
Isn’t he above us regular folk? Isn’t part of working hard & striving to be successful entitle you to some perks or “stripes” as we say?
Judging from the newspaper headlines this morning just like Panday he will be tried in the court of public opinion. Meanwhile Ken Julien will be swept under the carpet by the coceyea-broom-smoke-screen created by Sharma’s case. (UTT may breed the future CJ can we see the connection).
Oh Mani by the time you ready for public office the only devil’s spawn you’d have to to worry about is Patos son Brian. Maybe Mikela too but at least she cuter!!
By but u serious on Dec 1, 2006 | Reply
I agree with the judgement of PC. Let the courts handle it.
Mani…What questions you want me answer your he say she nonsense. Grow up na man.
By but u serious on Dec 1, 2006 | Reply
[But no longer anon, I wonder if Patos feels the same way about that? If he could come and tell Sharma “resign or be charged” isn’t that very telling that he thinks some people are above the law? If anyone commits a crime they should be charged right? Anybody ever hear a police tell a bandit, “put down the gun or be charged”? Whether or not he puts the gun down he’ll be charged. So why does Patos give Sharma that escape?]
Yea uncle Patos is so good he was offering Sharma the easy way out. He should also be charge for trying to pervert the course of justice.
By Vami on Dec 1, 2006 | Reply
I can only hope that this “system” is comprehensive and accounts for all the flies in the broth. See, I really do believe that it is not only the judiciary that is corrupt but also the entire government. You know like in “the lord of the rings.” you get the ring and it corrupts you….i see parallels with getting a seat in parliament here. so how about we try all of the crooks….or better yet, since we obviously can’t see to our own affairs (independence is only a joke term in trinidad)…we can set up an international council to arbitrate.
mani, for a while i was thinking that somebody finally stood up against Sat Maharaj=0) It almost sound too good to be true and it was…unfortunately!
By JohnBoy on Dec 3, 2006 | Reply
What is the issue at hand? Why we always always stary away from the relevant topic? It’s the CJ on trial. He is the one that allegedly committed an offence(notice presumption of innocence until proven otherwise) so let’s try focus on that for a bit. I mean really focus.
By Mani on Dec 4, 2006 | Reply
Ed, well the thing is I was wondering if there were provisions in our constitution to allow him to do that and then allow him to be reinstated if he was eventually cleared.
If I were him, I would hate to do the right thing only to be cleared and then find myself out of a job.
No longer Anon, Patos is micro managing at best and dictatoring at worst. I don’t understant that kind of instant justice Patos wants to hand down.
Boysie, doh worry I dealing with that UTT thing soon. U really find she cute dread? I mean the girl have some looks but she does look like a blasted ice queen. Not me and that.
But u serious, so I call yuh name and yuh appear dry so out of the blue. You know what questions you have to answer…which is the reason you disappeared for weeks. What he say/she say nonsense? You telling me to grow up? I’m not against trying Patos for perversion of the course of justice though.
Vami, yuh hear about the UTT bachannal? About Sat Maharaj, well don’t lose hope just yet, lol.
Johnboy, Well i don’t think we’d be straying much to dicuss Manning’s handling of the CJ matter. It’s part and parcel of this whole controversy. The law lords even mentioned that they were uneasy with the way the case was handled thus far (I’m paraphrasing). So I think Patos is a very relevant topic.
By JohnBoy on Dec 4, 2006 | Reply
Mani, point taken. Are you not wondering though that the Chief Justice would exercise faith in the system that he is the head of IF he is innocent of any wrong doing? Instead, typical of those who have money and or know the system they will try all kinda rigmorol (I guess if I was a lying cheating lawyer bastard I would try too) to avoid the justice.
By Mani on Dec 4, 2006 | Reply
Oh I agree with you 100% man. I think I even said that when I first talked about this.
Definitely I find it worrying that an “innocent” man would be afraid to face the very same court that he presides over. He reach all the way to England to fight a case he should have begun to fight here. I find that very strange. If he doh have faith in the court, then what happen to the rest of we?
By Hottie Hottie on Dec 5, 2006 | Reply
Since when anybody in power cares about the “rest of we”?
By Mani on Dec 7, 2006 | Reply
Um….it’s been a long time I think. Back in the days of never.
By Vami on Dec 9, 2006 | Reply
fill me in on this bacchanal nah. i didnt hear about it yet.
By ThisStillGoin'on? on Dec 10, 2006 | Reply
Everybody knows, but nobody knows.
Hold on to that judiciary!
Herbert Volney aside, it may be the only thing left in T&T that functions semi-properly.
Oh yeah–Akil Chambers…
Good grief!
Somebody knows what’s going on.
Rumors spread in Trinidad like wildfire, and unlike any other place in the world I have been, these rumors are invariably true.
So please, would somebody tell me a story? (A “gossip” blog–something. Anything?)
Tell me a story.
Everybody knows, but nobody knows.
By Mani on Dec 13, 2006 | Reply
well I wouldn’t say that the judiciary functions semi properly at all. Not after that Abu Bakr debacle.