Capricious decision

WE HAVE a great deal of difficulty with the decision of Mr. Justice Lloyd Ellis not to allow note-taking, except by the media, at the prison enquiry currently under way in Spanish Town.

Notwithstanding the fact that the Commissions of Enquiry Act allows Commissioners like Mr. Justice Ellis to "make sure rules for their own guidance, and the conduct and management of proceedings before them..." nonetheless, natural law and administrative law stipulate that such rules should not be arbitrary.

Arbitrary rules in such circumstances run the risk of being declared void if placed under the scrutiny of judicial review. The decision, in our view, is arbitrary in the extreme and as such we would question if it has a legal basis.

The enquiry, as defined, is public which means that persons are at liberty to enter and listen to the proceedings and the media are afforded the opportunity to report on them. Note-taking is an unobtrusive activity so the contention cannot be that it is disruptive of the proceedings.

That being the case we consider it capricious to seek to circumscribe the behaviour of persons attending the enquiry, as the learned judge has done, once they are not disruptive.

The seizing of the notebooks of some note takers as happened on Tuesday we consider an illegal act and they should seek legal redress.

Mr. Justice Ellis is adamant in his position that there will be no note-taking and that he will not back down. We would urge that he invoke Solomonic wisdom and reconsider his position.

The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner.

Back to Commentary