The Editor, Sir:

Mark Wellington wrote an interesting letter in your Sunday Gleaner on the subject of the Solicitor General. Perhaps I found this to be because he supported a couple of points I made in a letter I wrote to you some time back.

Professor Vasciannie would not need to start off with a proven track record in litigation to be a good Solicitor General. He would be part of a good, strong team, and would bring to that team a very strong knowledge and appreciation of the law. Too many persons have sought to focus on this 'qualification' and not on his awesome achievements in areas of law.

Errors

Mr. Wellington, however, made a couple of errors in his letter and as a reminder of the correct position I would point out to readers that the appointment of a Solicitor General would be made by the Governor-General on the advice of the Public Service Commission. He may send the advice back once to the commission for reconsideration but if the commission persists in its advice he should act in accordance with the advice.

The prime minister may, in relation to proposed appointments of Permanent Secretaries, make a comparable request that the commission reconsider its recommendation, but there is nothing that states that the commission must act in accordance with the request. There are some who believe that the post of Solicitor General should, in this respect, be equated with that of a permanent secretary, but there is no provision that states this.

Rancour

On a wider view, it is perhaps regrettable that in the 45 years of Jamaica's independence successive governments have not addressed points such as these. When the post of Attorney General was set out in the Constitution as a political governmental post, there was the opportunity of clarifying (whether in the Constitution or not, ideally the former) the position of the Solicitor General, who had hitherto been viewed as the assistant to the Attorney General, and much could have been avoided in a number of areas where views are now contending.

I wish the position could be resolved without rancour. There is an opportunity for statesmanship lurking. Will that opportunity be grasped, or is it too late for that in view of the utterances that have been made?

I am, etc.,

STILL AMUSED,

STILL CYNICAL

Kingston