The Tribune

WHEN WE read the remarks last week of Attorney General Allyson Maynard Gibson in defence of the integrity of our courts and the fairness of our judges, we recalled a 2016 report in a St Lucia newspaper about a Bahamian lawyer, accompanied by a Bahamian police officer, snooping around St Lucia ostensibly investigating the background of one of the most respected judges on our Supreme Court Bench today.

“Is CARICOM being used by Bahamas Government and Peter Nygard in Official Investigation by Bahamian Officials into Judge Indra Charles of the Bahamas Supreme Court?” asked the island’s local newspaper, St Lucia Today. The article was published in October last year.

Reported the newspaper (incidentally Keod Smith is not a parliamentarian as stated in the article): “A Bahamas barrister Keod Smith, a parliamentarian, along with a senior officer of the Bahamas Police Force were observed by the St Lucia authorities conducting a series of interviews and interrogations at Government Offices in the capital and around the island on the character of a former Judge of St Lucia, Indra Charles, who is now a Judge in The Bahamas.

“Some very disturbing questions have been put to citizens of St Lucia and Mr Smith is recorded in conversations where he described himself to be a lawyer for Peter Nygard who recently had displayed an interest in a Stem Cell hospice on the islands of St Lucia and St Kitts.

“A formal statement is being made to the St Lucia Government to enquire into the role it may be playing in this investigation. The St Lucia authorities have identified the two Bahamians who visited St Lucia and paid various officials to supply them with information of a private nature on Mrs Charles.

“Mrs Charles, according to news in The Bahamas, is the subject of a Committee in the Parliament which is examining a recent ruling given by her on the privileges of Members and the use of private emails in parliamentary debate.The people of St Lucia do not wish to become a pawn in this exercise of The Bahamas.

“This is an issue in which Prime Minister Allen Chastanet must speak to and avoid the appearance of our island’s participation in this clearly unsavoury and unconstitutional encroachment on the Judiciary of St Lucia and that of The Bahamas.”

At the same time last year there was also an article in the St Lucia Star urging its government “to distance itself from such questionable behaviour”.

Here in Nassau, Commissioner of Police Ellison Greenslade denied any knowledge of reports that a senior police officer was sent to St Lucia to assist in probing the background of Justice Indra Charles. The Commissioner insisted that no police officer could overstep their jurisdiction or operate independently of the Commissioner. He said that based on the information he had received, he had ordered an investigation. Since then there has been silence. There is always silence in matters that concern the public. No wonder there has been so much foot-dragging in legislating a Freedom of Information Act. Obviously, there are many serious matters that government would like kept from the public.

However, the matter of the integrity of the judiciary has caught our attention by the number of requests being made recently by certain litigants to have two judges - Justice Indra Charles being one - recuse themselves from hearing their cases. In Justice Rhonda Bain’s case, an extension of her retirement date seems to be the bait. But, to her credit, it does not appear that this strong judge is biting. She intends to hear her cases through, including those involving wealthy Lyford Cay resident Peter Nygard and his property dispute with which he is engaged with the Coalition to Protect Clifton Bay - now known as Save the Bays.

We do not know how far Commissioner Greenslade’s investigation went, but our enquiries confirm that on 8.9.2016 two Bahamians - Keod Smith, and a Nassau Police Officer (name withheld by The Tribune) - arrived in St Lucia from Miami. They both stayed at the St James Club. The policeman told Immigration that he was there on vacation, while Mr Smith said he was there in connection with matters to do with his legal profession.

The St Lucia newspapers told the rest of the story expressing anger at the Bahamian lawyer and police officer for snooping into Justice Charles’ private life, one of the newspapers demanding that St Lucia’s government “distance itself from such questionable behaviour”.

However, what has brought this matter centre stage at this time are not only the demands of certain litigants for recusal of certain judges (i.e. removal of judges from hearing their cases), but a report that Justice Charles had reported to the police that she and her family were being threatened by certain persons. We understand that she has been given extra police protection.

However, it is also alleged that Nygard’s lawyer Keod Smith went to the Chief Justice informing him that as Justice Charles had made complaints to the police against him, he wanted her recused from all cases pending against him.

Last year Justice Charles had adjourned for hearing an injunction in the ‘murder for hire’ allegations made against Peter Nygard and Keod Smith by several Save the Bays directors. The directors - Joseph Darville, Romauld Ferreira, Fred Smith and Louis Bacon - and independent plaintiff, Rev CB Moss, had alleged that Keod Smith had assisted Mr Nygard in orchestrating a two-and-a half year campaign of fear and violence to “kill or scare off” activities that Nygard saw as opposed to his development plans for his Lyford Cay property. The group is represented by Mr Ferron Bethel. Keod Smith and Nygard have denied the allegations.

However, on Thursday last week, the date Justice Charles had set for herself to hear the injunction, she was nowhere in sight. Instead she had been replaced by Justice Donna Newton, who had been recently appointed to the Bench. On Thursday, there was again an adjournment in what was thought to have been Judge Charles’ case. There was no explanation as to why the change of judges. It would seem that an explanation would have been appropriate - especially in view of the background, starting in St Lucia.

It is indeed a serious day when a citizen can seemingly exert such influence that they can decide who should judge their case. A sensible judge knows when he/she is too close to a litigant and can form their own judgment as to whether a recusal is necessary. A judge should not be pushed out just because he/she is not only strong in the law, but determined not to be influenced by outside issues. Is this perhaps what happened to Justice Charles? The public is certainly entitled to an explanation.

As Attorney General Allyson Maynard Gibson has observed: “The Supreme Court is charged with protection of our Constitution.” It is now time that the Bahamian people started asking questions about what is happening in their courts and, for the sake of this country and its people, make certain that the court’s integrity is upheld for the protection of future generations.