Principle in Jamaica is too often fluid and meandering. It will twist and flow in tandem with personal circumstance and, far too often, in accordance with political allegiance and expedience.

We are not surprised, therefore, to hear a rising cacophony in certain quarters for Professor Stephen Vasciannie to do the supposedly decent thing and withdraw his application for the post of Solicitor General, thus giving Prime Minister Bruce Golding an opportunity to have his preferred candidate, whomever that may be, placed in the job. Neither are we surprised at the profound silence on the issue from those, who, not so long ago, would be making noisy declarations about the sanctity of the Constitution and the need for moral, rules-based governance.

But having considered the urgings on Dr. Vasciannie to slink quietly off into the shadows, this newspaper says to him, do nothing of the sort. He must let events run their course and the rule of law have its way.

Indeed, Professor Vasciannie should be willing, if it comes to it, to test his claims in the courts. So too should the members of the Public Service Commission (PSC), individually or as an institution, should Mr. Golding press ahead with his reported attempts to have them fired and/or thwart their recommended appointment.

Our suggestion is not because we believe that anyone should be spoiling for a fight. Rather, fundamental principles, particularly, the notion of the Constitution as the supreme law, are at stake.

Under the Jamaican Constitution the PSC, a matter dealt with in chapter four of the document, is responsible for certain appointments to the public service, acting through the Governor-General. Among those jobs is the post of Solicitor General.

The Constitution allows the Prime Minister to ask the PSC, having recommended an appointment, to reconsider, once, its recommendations. It seems, on the face of it, that if the PSC holds its ground the appointment must go through. Moreover, membership of the PSC is a fixed five-year term and members can't be fired, except for 'misbehaviour' what constitutes this is not defined.

Dr. Vasciannie, a man of high intellect, is a former political colleague when both were members of the National Democratic Movement, which Mr. Golding formed and left to return to the Jamaica Labour Party, in which he was nurtured. Dr. Vasciannie, at the time, wrote a rather uncomplimentary commentary about Mr. Golding, who now not only leads the JLP but is head of government. That, perhaps, gives as much of the context to the Prime Minister's opposition to Dr. Vasciannie's appointment as the claim by detractors that he lacks courtroom experience.

Supporters of Mr. Golding say he has the right to demand as Solicitor General someone with whom he has political rapport and that his action has shown that he can be tough and decisive. Both they and Mr. Golding, who promised high, moral governance and restraint on prime ministerial power, miss the point. If the Constitution is not a shackle to prime ministerial (mis)behaviour, what then is sacrosanct under the law?