SHOULD THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF T&T RESIGN?

 I have known Reginald Armour for a long time - more than thirty years - and although I can say that we are not, and never have been, friends, I can also say that I never had any reason to doubt that his integrity was such that he would not lie, and certainly not so as to attempt to mislead anybody deliberately, much less a Court of Law, whether in Trinidad & Tobago or in any other part of the world. At least, not until now, because the revelations coming out from that Miami court room are , to put it mildly, most disturbing.

But the facts which have come out since a Miami Judge basically said that Mr. Armour should not be a plaintiff in a matter relating to allegations of corruption involving his (Mr. Armour's) former clients concerning the construction of the Piarco airport have given me cause for deep concern.  The code of conduct that governs lawyers in this (T&T's) jurisdiction includes an injunction that a lawyer must never mislead a Court.  But it seems that Mr. Armour has done just that. Whether he did so knowingly is another matter. He says that because it was almost twenty years ago he couldn't remember.  But this had to be one of the biggest cases in his career and this explanation, while it might be true, certainly appears to be unbelievable to the ordinary observer. It was one in which the whole country was extremely interested in and whether he was a junior lawyer confined to taking notes (which he says, but which has turned out to be untrue) or a senior lawyer leading in a defence in a preliminary hearing (which is what appears from the Court records) his position is certainly untenable. 

One of the leading cases in apparent bias comes from a case in the 1920's, R v. Sussex.  In that case three judges found a defendant guilty of whatever he was accused of (I can't remember what).  But it turned out on appeal that the clerk to the Court was in the room when the judges were doing their deliberations. The Court of Appeal held that there was a possibility that the clerk might have influenced the judges in their deliberations although there was no record that he had. But, the Court of Appeal decided,  it was dangerous because he MIGHT have done so. So they overturned the conviction. Put another way, a lawyer cannot give advice to Mr. X today and then act for Mr. Y against Mr. X tomorrow in the same matter. (Indeed, a lawyer having advised Mr. X in a matter years ago (and been paid for that advice) ought not to take a case against Mr. X in a different matter today.)

Well, using that logic one can honestly say  with hand on heart that there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Mr. Armour did use his knowledge from his former position  to benefit his new client, the State. But (and you knew that there would be a "but, didn't you?) the POSSIBILITY exists that he MIGHT have. Personally, I doubt that he did, but that ain't the point! The point is in the word "might" and one would expect that this point would be impossible to prove one way or the other.   But an Attorney General as the titular head of the Bar must ensure that at all times that nobody can accuse him (or her) in circumstances such as this, of behaving improperly.   

So? What should Mr. Armour do? In one word: resign. At the very least there has been a dreadful mistake the responsibility for which must stop at his door. And at the worst? Well, let's not go there.                                                                                                                                                                                   

THE ABUSING OF THE CHILDREN HAS BEEN FORGOTTEN

 Well, it looks as though I will win my bet with myself that absolutely nothing will be done for those children at risk in the children's homes across the country. Their stories have been pushed off the front pages (indeed, of all the pages) in the print media by the rather stupid obfuscations of the Attorney General  as to whether or not he lied to a Miami court and by other things. Frankly, I believe that the AG is guilty and can't understand why it is taking so long for people to see that or for him to be fired. But this post is not about Mr. Armour's  (or anybody else's) machinations, it is about the children.

These abused kids are facing individual crises of unimaginable proportions and need help right now. And "now" must mean NOW! Look, if we want to build a country that can be "a shining city on the hill" we have to look out and help the youngest generations. They need our support. Most of them are facing hunger and poverty and some of the most unlucky ones are facing unspeakable abuses ranging from vicious beatings to rape and everything in between. It might be too late to save the older ones, but it isn't too late to save the younger ones. In any case, we should not give up on trying to help the older ones. For crying out loud, they definitely don't deserve to be simply ignored. We MUST HELP.

I am an opinion writer. My purpose is to try and inform the public and maybe change minds. But ultimately I hope to make a difference on important issues and realities. I recognize that it is very difficult to sustain public interest on almost any issue for long enough to make that difference. But I can dream, can't I?

THE ABSOLUTE INCOMPETENCE OF THOSE IN CHARGE OF THE POLICE

 What exactly is going on with the so-called investigation into the abuse of CHILDREN in state owned/funded children's homes? I have written about this problem until I'm sick of it. I have said that I didn't think that anything will come of it, but I did believe that the police might at least pretend that they were treating this matter with urgency. To my absolute dismay I see that they are not!

R9obert Sabga is a friend of mine. He wrote to me this morning (Thursday 8th June) that someone in the Trinidad & Tobago Police Service (the TTPS) had  (finally) called him last night (7th June) and asked him for a witness statement for everything that is in the 1997 report! Can you believe that!? Come on Mr. Acting Commissioner of Police. Come on. Get off your big, fat tail and put down the cup of coffee and DO SOMETHING!  What are we paying you for? The bottom line is that children are being abused. And only now your people are approaching Mr. Sabga for a witness statement!?!? Apart from the fact that the 1997 report has Mr. Sabga's signature on it, don't you, McDonald Jacob, think that this is the height of incompetence?  And this is what you call an investigation? And there is a very strong possibility that children are still being abused?  When are you going to do something to save the children? Today? Tomorrow? Next week? Next year? Never?

This would be something for a comedy movie if it weren't so serious. It is a little like the joke that is going around the country: a man telephones the police to say that there is  a burglar in his yard. The police tell him that they can't come right now because they don't have any cars available. Five minutes later the man calls back the police to say don't bother to come. I just shot and killed him with my unlicensed gun. Five minutes later the police show up but there is no gun and no body. The police then say "I thought you said that you shot and killed a man'. The guy then replies 'I thought you said you had no cars'!

My message to the Acting Commissioner of Police is: move, follow, or get out of the way. This is way past a joke now and you clearly have done sweet nothing. If you don't know what to do then get out of the way. And Mr. Minister of National Security you deal with it. Put somebody in charge who at least pretends to care about the children. There are enough people in this country who have good ideas about what to do. SAVE THE CHILDREN NOW! And stop messing around.

"SLOWLY PROGRESSING"

 You will forgive me for returning AGAIN to this nasty problem that exists in the country of children being abused in State owned/funded children's homes. This morning's Trinidad Guardian (7th June, 2022) reports that the Assistant Commissioner of Police Sharon Cooper in charge of the investigative team that was appointed by Acting Commissioner of Police McDonald Jacob  on 16th May (some 22 days ago) was in the process of "currently interviewing persons"  and "are presently at the point of acquiring statements to obtain evidence". She also is reported as saying that "presently there is no need to relocate anyone" because "at this time none of the persons  interviewed is in harm's way". But on 25th May the Acting Commissioner of Police told the Parliament some NINE days after he appointed the investigative team that the team was in the early stages of its investigation and, "up to that time, they had not identified people within the children's homes that they can recommend being removed from the institutions immediately".

So? What the heck is going on? Is the Assistant Commissioner of Police saying that after more than THREE WEEKS that no evidence has been found or that there are NO REASONABLE suspicions that anybody MIGHT be guilty of some sort of abuse? Because if this is the case then Mr. Sabga's and Ms. Jones's respective committees are going to have to do a lot of explaining as to why their reports are false.

Frankly, I don't believe that the reports are false and I do believe that there has been some serious abuse which is still continuing, And this is where my problem begins: if the abuse is still going on don't we owe it to the children to take action IMMEDIATELY? NOW? And 'now' must mean 'now' - today, not tomorrow, not next week, but today! What is better? To suspend an innocent man or woman from his/her job, or to risk having an innocent child being abused? And that is the choice! We can pay the innocent man/woman to stay home while the evidence is being collected. But we can't pay for the abusing of an innocent child.

Right now there is a very real possibility that children are still being abused. But the police investigation is slowly progressing and a confidential report will be made "soon". And the authorities  are "investigating"! And we wonder why the crime rate is so high? Nobody is ever caught and prosecuted. Nobody! I have a bet with myself that absolutely nothing will come of this "investigation". Perhaps one or two very small fry might be caught, but this whole mess will be like the Akiel Chambers thing. No charges at all! But, we must be happy because the investigation is "slowly progressing".

 

INEFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP AND SNOW JOBS

  There is only one test for leadership: to lead, and to lead vigorously.  But just as important is effective  leadership. Of course, if a person (0r a group of persons) aspires to be a leader then one would hope for his/her leadership to be effective. A good example of ineffective leadership is the donkey that is in charge of Venezuela right now. More than six million of his countrymen have fled, most for economic reasons, and some for political ones, but this has taken place in what is potentially one of the wealthiest countries in the world. But Maburro stays in power with the very competent help (in staying in power) of the Cuban dictatorship. Without the Cubans and their very efficient security system which takes out (either by murder or lock up or both) any potential opponent the idiot would have been toppled long ago.

But this is not about Maburro and his incompetence, nor is it about those hypocrites who are clamoring for Cuba et al to attend the Summit of the Americas but are refusing to criticize Maburro and company as vigorously as they do the United States. This is about Trinidad & Tobago and the total and complete ineffectiveness of our leaders in dealing with the crisis concerning children's homes in this country. And this is about the snow job that those in charge are trying to pull on us  on this issue. A 'snow job', by the way, is defined as "an effort to deceive, persuade or overwhelm with insincere talk". And that is exactly what the Government is trying to pull on us: a snow job.

But let's deal with their ineffective leadership first. As this is being written (today, Saturday 4th June) nobody has yet been removed from his/her post or even suspended. And yet the evidence in the public domain suggests strongly that last night and the night before, and the night before, and so on, that a child was abused and that she/he will be abused tonight.  In a million years you cannot argue that "appointing a committee" and leaving everyone in place for the time being until the committee reports is an example of effective leadership. Look, I'm not going to argue about the ineffectiveness of the Government's economic policies nor am I going to argue about the proposed sale of the Petrotrin refinery or anything else for the time being. While all these issues (and more) are important they pale in comparison to this one.  My overriding concern is for the children - and the sad fact that abuse is still taking place and NOBODY has been charged or held accountable.

And here is where we come to the various snow jobs. Although, one can say with a great deal of justification that BOTH sides of the political divide have clearly dropped the ball on this one, the fact is that the Rowley led Government has been in power now just a few months short of seven years. And yet in that time the only thing that appears to have been done to save the children has been the appointment of several committees. Dr. Rowley's ministers, like Camille Robinson Regis and Ayanna Webster Roy, have tried to say that this Government cares, to which I say: really? But nothing has been done. People who were there yesterday are still there today. Let's not even talk about the millions that have gone down the drain. So? What exactly is being done RIGHT NOW to prevent further abuse? And don't tell me that you are "investigating". 

Mr. Prime Minister, the house is on fire and instead of arguing about who started the fire, use your office to put it out - NOW! We can argue later about who is really to blame. Of course, you needn't bother if you really believe that these kids aren't worth saving. But most right thinking people (including me) think otherwise. ACT NOW! SAVE THE KIDS!!

PRIORITIES

 It would be a joke if the consequences weren't so serious and tragic. In this morning's newspapers Camille Robinson Regis spends her time in castigating Robert Sabga for allegedly doing nothing when he submitted his report on the abuse being suffered by children and alleged that he (Sabga) was "rewarded" for his report by being made High Commissioner to Canada. Of course, the minor fact that the process of appointing a person as an ambassador starts about six months or more before the appointment is actually made is ignored; that and the fact that within a very short time after handing in his report Mr. Sabga was sent to Canada. But somehow it is his (Sabga's) fault that no action was taken and that it is to the credit of this Government that this has come to light now and that they are doing something about it now such as holding meetings and drinking coffee.

But leaving all that aside and assuming (though not accepting) that the goodly lady is right to castigate Mr, Sabga, Mrs. Robinson Regis defends the Government's seeming inaction by saying that a meeting has already been held and actions will be taken and the Prime Minister really cares about the children and , in any case, the wicked and evil UNC sat on its hands for twenty-five years and did nothing about it until the PNM came along.

Oh crikey! This woman can't be serious! First question: in the last twenty-five years who has been in power and when? Did the PNM at any time know about the report? Didn't the good lady herself refer to it in Parliament, or is the Hansard wrong?

Next question: what is the Government doing NOW to save the children who (it seems) are STILL being abused up to today as you read this?

You see, it is as if a house is on fire and the Government instead of trying to put out the fire is appointing a committee to discuss the best ways to put out the fire. The fact that the house is burning down is less important to them than trying to put out the fire. In fact, they seem to think that it is more important to find out who is to blame for the fire in the first place rather than putting it out. And when somebody asks them to put out the fire FIRST and then argue afterwards, that person who made the unreasonable suggestion of putting out the fire first is totally ignored and regarded as some sort of crazy person who doesn't understand how the thing works. If somebody is removed (much less arrested and charged) then, heaven forbid, the whole ugly story might come out and we  (whoever 'we' are) might be blamed for it.

But, the abuse in the children's homes is continuing. And now, twenty-five years later nobody is doing anything about it other than sitting around a conference table and drinking coffee. But the people in charge care. At least, so they say!