Comments on: Judicial decisions time limit law can have adverse effect – Chancellor

By: Juan Gabriel

Juan Gabriel — Tue, 05 May 2009 01:49:03 +0000

Talking about legislation! What about that which gives Mr Jagdeo autonomy over every conceivable perks, the cost of which will be borne by Guyanese tax payers, when he demits office. Poor , downtrodden guyanese are forced to retire at age 55 and have to wait until they are 60, if they are alive ,to begin receiving their pension. HoweverPRESEE will retire at 47 and have the worl THROWN AT HIS FEET. TALK and WRITE about that!

By: Starboy

Starboy — Tue, 05 May 2009 01:27:31 +0000

War 530 and Others,get real man.this is the same judical officer who had the opportunity to implement these workable inititative(s)over the years,yet the back log keep mounting.Man the people have suffered enough fighting for justice.this is one of the reasons why the crime rate is so high.the people are taking the law into there own hands because of the slothful behavior of the judical system.Congrats ppp gov’t this bill has been long overdue.kindly ensure it is enforced NOW.

By: MADNESS

MADNESS — Mon, 04 May 2009 22:57:36 +0000

JUSTICE=HONESTY AND IF THEREIS NO HONESTY THERE CANNOT BE ANY BASE> A WEAK FOUNDATION

By: REDDY IN BARBADOS

REDDY IN BARBADOS — Mon, 04 May 2009 18:43:38 +0000

I don’t agee with War_530 argument about “financial incentives”. This will surely affect the dispensation of justice. These untoucahabls will find all types of tricks, like mehanics urging unnecceasry repairs, to prolong cases and get more money.
The threat of bringing in more judges is a good one because
existing judges know more of them will reduce cases and , they will oppose it. Just like lawyes.
Oh yes, our good friends the lawyers.The idea of passing any refroms for the “bar Association” to look over is incredulous . In Barbados, and probably in Guyana, this little protective clique group is nothing but a social club. The have their own complaints body which, you guessed it, hardly ever rules against members doing wrong doing. Forget about them (the present lawyer system because there are some altruistic idealist ones) !
Judges should be paid a fair wage, not on incentive basis, and they should be made to clock in (figuratively speaking) like anybody else.

By: Soldier

Soldier — Mon, 04 May 2009 18:11:56 +0000

This is the most sensible comment on this whole issue SWAT, let Samaroo and others read this and make sure you understand Samaroo or you may want to react..

By: storme williams

storme williams — Mon, 04 May 2009 16:57:51 +0000

The legislation violates the separation of powers doctrine and is unconstitutional. Would not stand the light of day if challenged.

By: Brendan Samaroo

Brendan Samaroo — Mon, 04 May 2009 16:05:42 +0000

did you say independent judicial system? heheehee ahahahahhaahaa ha!

By: Brendan Samaroo

Brendan Samaroo — Mon, 04 May 2009 16:05:09 +0000

well andy ultimately she reports to the king.

We should just formalize that…

By: janedoe

janedoe — Mon, 04 May 2009 13:24:16 +0000

Latchman Kissoon’s comment maybe masked in sarcasm but it is very poignant.

By: Marlon Rajijah

Marlon Rajijah — Mon, 04 May 2009 04:33:13 +0000

There is and was no independent judicial system. Look at it how you want it, taxpayers money pay the judiciary as well as the gov’t. The President appoints judges. While the legislative and the judiciary are supposed to be independent as per books there are other factors which militate against this. Most often the need for independence is relative to whoever is speaking or writing. I am sure you can think of times you will want to ask the gov’t to interfere. Similarly, you will want the judges to interfere in the legislative. The independence you claim is absolute, such absolutes do not exist.

By: caesar agustus

caesar agustus — Mon, 04 May 2009 01:01:54 +0000

I disagree. He is better than party elected JOF Hayes.

By: Marlon Rajijah

Marlon Rajijah — Mon, 04 May 2009 00:38:08 +0000

War_530, I commended you blog but the moderator in his or her best educated judgment saw it fit not to allow it. It might be because I compared your entry with the usual crap that passes for blogs.

By: Marlon Rajijah

Marlon Rajijah — Mon, 04 May 2009 00:35:30 +0000

We can depend on lawyers to say crap like this. We have quite a few in parliament.

By: WRodney

WRodney — Mon, 04 May 2009 00:17:22 +0000

This guy has been the head for a long time. I do not reside in GY. Can anyone say if their has been any improvement in the justice system of GY. The passage of the bill might be an indication of what this gentleman has achieve.

By: Mr K. Smith

Mr K. Smith — Sun, 03 May 2009 23:02:21 +0000

Hey, WAR_530 says:

Dont forget that it can also take YEARS for some to just move a piece of paper (”legal document”) out of a lawyer’s office, to the Court House up the street! Perhaps, only the Chancellor can say to what extent old fashion incompetence and corruption are also adding to the backlog.

By: SOL

SOL — Sun, 03 May 2009 20:37:43 +0000

expected this from YOU lk

By: Cochore

Cochore — Sun, 03 May 2009 18:57:47 +0000

Yasuman, Kissoon is just being sarcastic, so never mind the dude is just kidding…

By: decanadianCarlVeecock

decanadianCarlVeecock — Sun, 03 May 2009 18:41:12 +0000

All of a sudden we hearing from this guy!

I wonder why?

Seeing the end of his tenure?

Maybe!!

By: jones

jones — Sun, 03 May 2009 16:26:36 +0000

Marlon the man is trying to say if i read him correctly is that the govt of the day is too much involve in the day to day administration of justice in guyana. Its seems that their is no independent judicial system in guyana.

By: caesar agustus

caesar agustus — Sun, 03 May 2009 16:09:29 +0000

A case hinges on two things.Observation and inference.Observation is what is seen by witnesses as evidence,hence a conviction.Inference is based on what is assumed.Example,a murder was committed and onlookers saw a man running from the scene with a knife.They did not witness the actual murder.Therefore,circumstantial evidence.It is more difficult to convict someone here.The fact of the matter nevertheless is that judges are dwadling on the bench.Idling.Too much ceremonial flim flam before court cases.Taking too long to arrive at decisions on clear cut cases.With the very law books right in front of them.Get more judges if that is what it takes and get going.

By: yasuman71

yasuman71 — Sun, 03 May 2009 15:14:16 +0000

I can’t believe someone with your qualification could write such nonsense.

By: Cochore

Cochore — Sun, 03 May 2009 14:49:51 +0000

The more I read these comments coming from this Chancellor, Justice Carl Singh, it becomes painfully obvious as to why this position is still an acting appointment. Further, the general attitude of these Judges and Magistrates serving on the Judiciary, as it relates to public service, is worst than previously envisioned.

Just by listening to this Chancellor, I can hardly detect any independence or initiative coming from this Judicial Branch. Therefore once we knowingly continue to compromise the independence of the Judiciary for political expediency, then Public Service is no longer a mitigating principle in effective governance. Mr. Chancellor, I agree that ‘Time Limits’ should never have been imposed on the Judiciary, but where is the organizational initiative and pride in Public Service???…

By: Marlon Rajijah

Marlon Rajijah — Sun, 03 May 2009 14:06:33 +0000

Well said War_530! I am in full agreement with you. This is the kind of comment I expect in these blogs not the crap I’ve seen hurled around on a daily basis. Thank you so much!

By: SWAT

SWAT — Sun, 03 May 2009 13:41:50 +0000

It amazes me that the Acting Chancellor and his colleagues cannot come up with workable solutions to address this tremendous backlog of cases. Their inaction has caused Parliament to intervene because the “status quo” was NOT WORKING and citizens were being denied due process. Now that Parliament has acted, it is time to stop the complaining and live with the outcome.