Judges correct in Keith Clarke case
The EDITOR, Madam:
I grew up with my grandfather Azariah, a millionaire, entrepreneur and well read, who was born February 6, 1886, and from whom I learnt a lot, and who told me that he got his education from The Gleaner, and of course the Bible.
I saw him reading The Gleaner every day and read some with him. Since I left home about 1952, I never missed a copy, often read before breakfast, mainly for education and information. I can say the same of all other daily papers including the Observer, the only one to survive against The Gleaner, the brainchild of our Butch Stewart of ATL and hotel fame.
Page A5 of today’s issue (20/02/2020) reported on ‘Issues still to be resolved after court ruling’ with special reference that it took too long for the then minister to issue certificates of good faith as the Supreme Court decided and that the matter may reach the Privy Council.
While I hope the prime minister will respond to legal and public opinions that appeals to Privy Council should be abolished and that it will be abolished before this matter can reach there, it is safe to conclude:
1. All reasons shown by judges of the Supreme Court are of such sound and acceptable standards in this matter expected of a court of justice, further justify abolition of appeals to the Privy Council.
2. It is also my safe conclusion that the judgment is correct in finding that the certificates were issued too late, in that, as I often repeat, the hackneyed statement of law that a public officer was not appointed to do anything unreasonable, and anything the public officer does that is unreasonable, is unlawful and ultra vires (beyond the power of the public officer). And again, delay defeats equity, and the indolent and equity was invented to mitigate every branch of law except criminal law, and so while it follows the law, it does not do so slavishly.
Owen S. Crosbie
Hotel Street, Manchester