I wish to offer a few brief comments in response to J DeCoteau's letter published in the Sunday Guardian of September 21, regarding the remarks made to commemorate the first sitting of the Tax Appeal Court for the 2014-15 law term.
First of all, I am very grateful to the writer and the T&T Guardian newspaper for publishing the letter as we welcome all constructive comments. In essence, the writer indicated that his family was awaiting a decision of the Court but went on to query whether the absence of research facilities could legitimately contribute to delay in delivering judgments given the proximity of the Supreme Court library and online research facilities.
In this regard, one of the critical comments made at the first sitting of the court was the absence of research officers as well as the absence of a law library for the past eight years. This loss was initially directly attributable to the lack of proper premises from which to operate since the Court's eviction from the Hall of Justice. Also, in more recent times but directly related, is the lack of funding as well as research personnel as indicated, hence the need for greater financing.
Indeed even our relatively small budgetary allocation for the library has tended to be exhausted quickly and wired for numerous other purposes owing to shortfalls in funds allocated. It should be noted that the research materials required are seldom available elsewhere and we also have major financial constraints in funding subscriptions to relevant online databases which would be most helpful to us but regrettably are beyond our reach financially.
In my opening remarks I also alluded to the absence of the JEMS software or other means which would have been most helpful to the Court in tracking cases and of course giving a breakdown of how cases are disposed of. However, I can assure the writer that a number of significant judgments were delivered in the past law term notwithstanding the relevant constraints indicated.
Though the challenges faced by the Court reflect many of those identified by the Chief Justice, I am sure the writer will also be aware that the Court enjoys far less resources than other judicial entities despite its vintage, and therefore it is difficult as suggested to put one's house in order because it is the very absence of appropriate levels of financing which would enable us so to do.
In relation to the frustrations experienced by the writer, I can only empathise. Indeed, it is extremely frustrating not to receive the kind of recognition and financial support that would enable the Court to operate even more efficiently on an exponential basis.
As to the reference to building empire, I believe that, with respect, the writer may not be conversant with the modus operandi and philosophy of the Court since all clients are not only treated with customary efficiency by Court staff and the Court as a whole, it has been our hallmark over the years of the Court's existence over almost five decades to be client-oriented and focused.
This has continued to be even more so over the past decade notwithstanding the challenges faced by this Court which no other in the land has ever faced and this is indeed a matter of record.
I wish to end by thanking the writer for his/her comments and inviting him/her to contact the Court to arrange a meeting which we will be pleased to facilitate in order to clarify any other issues which the writer may have. While we would not be able to discuss any specific case, we are always receptive to appropriate levels of interfacing with all who have an interest in the Court's work.
Justice Anthony DJ Gafoor
Chairman, Tax Appeal Court