More questions than answers

The Attorney General’s recent statement that he is not to be blamed over his government’s latest fiasco I find, is just not right. His defence that he is not versed in Criminal Law and but only Civil Law is rather strange. The AG surely cannot expect the population to believe that a whole new Ministry of Justice (at great expense to the taxpayers) was formed just because he is not so versed. If so, what does this say of the Prime Minister’s selection of her staff. All previous prime ministers each chose an AG who was well-rounded in law to give them wise counsel. So the question is, why was the same not done in this case?

The AG seems to have been allocated an unlimited amount of money and resources to hire the “best” legal advice when he thinks it necessary. The amount of money he has spent on foreign Queen’s Counsels and local senior counsels is a testimony to this fact. So why did he not do the same in this case if, as he argued, his support staff was not up to the task?  Finally, how come a simple (and I mean no disrespect) journalist can discover this aberration while two “deserving” members of Cabinet who received silk last year could not? If this problem was above their pay grade then one needs to be fired and the other must quit. It is time that this unsavoury misstep be exposed to the full sunlight.