2 minute read
Judges/magistrates’ rulings...
FROM PAGE 6 ercised their free speech right in two matters of significant public interest.
They know that a cardinal principle of democracy is freedom of expression/ speech, subject to restrictions such as invasion of privacy, public safety, national security, obscenity, hate speech, and slander/ defamation, but they must exercise their fiduciary right to protect and defend the state’s interests.
Advertisement
The Guyana constitution, Article 146 (1) affords them this right. “Except with his or her own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his or her freedom of expression....” Article 146 (1).
Nowhere in the Guyana constitution do judges/ magistrates’ rulings fall into the restrictive categories.
In the bastion of democracy, the US, any citizen, scholar, or the media can criticise judicial proceedings at any stage in the process, including rulings.
The power of free speech is captured in the first Amendment to the US constitution: "Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech."
In Guyana, freedom of expression/speech relative to the judiciary has been partly restricted by the non-constitutional “sub judice” rule (by which a citizen or the media are not allowed to criticise the process of a trial). Not - withstanding, executive policymakers have shown a willingness to exercise their free speech rights and criticise judges/magistrates’ rulings.
Some of us still treat the judiciary as a divine-like institution to be viewed with “awe.” This is a colonial relic and should be devoid of its “sacrosanct’ nature.
Citizens, the media, and policymakers asserting their free speech right, do in no way undermine the judiciary’s work or detract from its role in the administration of justice.
Furthermore, all the branches of government, including the judiciary, should not stifle citizens’ freedom of expression/ speech and demonstrate that sovereignty indeed belongs to the people.
The evolution of the administration of justice has been impacted by the growing need for fair play, transparency, and accountability as well as new forms of social and economic relations.
The rule of law must, therefore, be relevant and aligned to changing social reality and national development needs. We cannot make old laws and customs the foundation for a new social development any more than the old laws and customs created the old social conditions.
Sincerely,
Dr Tara Singh
the victims and their families.
While feeling and expressing grief and sorrow, there is also anger within me that keys to open escape doors were not easily accessible for emergency situations like fires or flooding.
Lives could have been spared had the caretakers been more responsible in their handling of this kind of emergency, and if there were dress rehearsals or drills of what to do during such calamities. There were several fires recently in several parts of Guyana; lives were lost.
The country should have learned from them. Caretakers should have been better prepared for fire disasters as well as other emergencies. A fire or a natural disaster can happen anytime and anywhere.
Fire drills should be a regular occurrence at all dwellings for students, etc…, as is routinely done in developed countries. I really hope much is learnt from this latest tragedy.
The government should immediately hold drills at all government buildings including schools and tertiary institutions on how to escape fires and other disasters.
Yours truly, Vishnu
Bisram
