Senator Hinds is known for his rabble-rousing tactics and glitz rhetoric in the Senate, but his recent criticism of the four "eminent" Senior Counsel who voiced their opinion that the PM's stay at the Gopauls' residence did not violate the Integrity in Public Life Act is foolish and unjustified. Martin Daly SC is known for his independence and is a main critic of the Government.
Russell Martineau SC served as a former AG under the PNM and is not known to be a supporter of the UNC. Sir Ramsahoye QC is internationally respected for his legal prowess. And Alan Newman QC is a respected British barrister. It is clear that the AG made a careful selection to avoid the perception of bias and it is wrong for Hinds to attack the integrity and character of these legal luminaries because the advice did not resonate with the PNM.
The Government was obliged to get advice on this matter because the chairman of the Integrity Commission prejudiced the court of public opinion with his comment that the PM should have stayed in a hotel. The Government had no choice but to counteract this. The tide of public opinion turned towards the PNM.
Furthermore, it is prudent for the Government to seek advice and whether Chairmen St Cyr should therefore disqualify himself from the investigation. Hinds should stop blowing hot air. He should not attack people's professional reputations and judgments for the sake of political convenience. I wonder if Hinds would have been so vocal if these lawyers had concluded that the PM's stay at the Gopauls violated the law?
Walter Hamel-Smith
Port-of-Spain