SEDITION AND LIES

"Sedition is a misdemeanour at common law consisting of acts done, words spoken and published, or writings capable of being a libel published, in each case with intention to bring into hatred or contempt, or to exercise disaffection against ... the government and constitution ... or either House of Parliament, or the administration of justice; or to excite the [citizenry] to attempt, otherwise than by lawful means, the alteration of any matter in church or state by law established; or to incite persons to commit any crime in general disturbance of the peace; or to raise discontent or disaffection amongst [the citizenry]; or to promote feelings of ill will and hostility between different classes of [the citizenry].
Halsbury's Laws of England, 3rd Edition, Volume 10, page 569


I've posted the above so that people can read for themselves what exactly the law of sedition is all about. You don't have to be a lawyer to understand that this is a very serious offence and gives the State some fairly wide powers. However, while it is the police who makes the decision to arrest someone for sedition it is the Director of Public prosecutions who decides whether or not that person should be charged and prosecuted for this offence.


So? Where exactly are we with what can loosely be termed "the Watson Duke affair"? You see, questions have arisen in my mind ... with everything else that has been going on in good old T&T ... as to whether or not there really is "fire" behind this "smoke" of his arrest, or whether it's just a 'smoke making machine". I have noticed that up to now we haven't been told exactly what the words are alleged to have been used by Mr. Duke that the police believe might be seditious. (Or at least, I haven't seen it.) Why? There is a not unreasonable suspicion in civil society that the real reason that he has been arrested is because he has been not only offending the living daylights out of the Prime Minister but is also scaring the h*** out of him in Tobago where most pundits are predicting that he will win the two Tobago seats in the next general election! (But that's another story for another time!)


The short point here is that the police should be advised to tread very carefully on this one and take scrupulous care  not to be seen or perceived as a tool (unwitting or otherwise) of the Government.  I suspect that Mr. Duke will not be charged and will eventually be released. If this happens, that would be a huge scandal as most people will believe that his arrest was simply a ploy to scare him and shut him up. If he is eventually charged, I sure hope for the sake of the taxpayers that the State is able to prove its case. Not to win this case would raise too many ugly and most unnecessary suspicions that are better left unexpressed ... at least for the moment.


Which leads on to the next question: is our Prime Minister a liar? You see, in this morning's Guardian newspaper there is a report (which is not in the Express) that the Prime Minister is quoted as saying that he never met the former Director of the SSA as Prime Minister. Now IF this report is true then it raises all sorts of other questions, the first one being why didn't you meet with him as Prime Minister. The Prime Minister is the chairman of the National Security Council. The SSA is arguably the most important of the security arms of the State. For a Prime Minister not to meet with the Director of the SSA speaks to a serious dereliction of duty on the part of the Prime Minister. You see, either he didn't meet with Dennie because he (Rowley) didn't attend National Security Council meetings or Dennie didn't attend. And if Dennie didn't attend then what did Dr. Rowley do about his non attendance ... because this was never raised in the 2016 case that Dennie won against the State. And if it was Dr. Rowley who didn't attend the meetings then what does that say about him?


Put another way, Dr. Rowley cannot have it both ways. He can't say that he never met Dennie as Prime Minister and did nothing about it. He can't now say that why Dennie was fired is because he (Dennie) didn't attend National Security Council meetings because that was never raised in the 2016 lawsuit. So? The available evidence suggests that he (Rowley) has lied about this. But if he has lied to us about this a legitimate question is what else has he lied to us about?


You see, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck it is most unlikely that it is a pussy cat!