The issues surrounding Chief Justice Ivor Archie continued to be in focus Sunday, as Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley questioned the Law Association’s political affiliations and said it seemed as though the body had a problem with the CJ’s lifestyle.
Speaking at the installation of a new People’s National Movement Diego Martin West Constituency executive Sunday, Rowley said the main basis for rejecting the call by the Law Association to invoke Section 37 of the Constitution to trigger a tribunal to investigate the Chief Justice is a lack of evidence.
“But they have a problem which formed no part of the evidence put before me or my advising lawyer, and it is this, all of them who you see carrying on with this story about the Chief Justice, they have a problem with the Chief Justice’s lifestyle, it was never recorded and presented to me.
“But they wanted to use me as Prime Minister to carry out their private and secret talks. I am not involved in that. Yet he who has something to say come out and say it and he who has something to do, come out and do it and that goes for the media too.”
Last week, Dr Rowley made public advice given to him by Queen’s Counsel Howard Stevens that informed his decision not to take action against the Chief Justice. Since then he has been criticised by several people in the legal fraternity.
On Sunday, Rowley took aim at the Law Association for its continued persistence on this matter.
“That is not the new society that we are trying to build. The new society that we are trying to build is one that would have a Law Association that would know that it ought not to be at the behest, at the call, at the coming and going of a corrupt political party. The society we are trying to build is not one where the legal fraternity is one where a handful of people with a serious political agenda could call a meeting of the Law Association.
“This one bring 20 of his party members, that one bring 10 and out of 4,000 lawyers thereabout, 150 vote to remove the Chief Justice.”
The Prime Minster said when it came to issues involving possible misconduct on the part of members of the United National Congress the Law Association had nothing to say. He made it clear that he does not work for the Law Association and will continue to ignore them.
He said to accede to its request would mean encouraging indiscipline in the Judiciary and society.