“IF Marston Gibson is our new Chief Justice, his appointment will be as tainted as the appointment of David Simmons. The law was changed for one man: Marston Gibson. The law was proved to be worth nothing. It was a minor inconvenience standing in the way of a government that wanted to do what it wanted to do. So, the DLP government changed the law.
Tomorrow it will be some other law that stands in the way of what the government in power wants to do, and another law will be changed in the middle of the night with no public debate or societal discourse on why the law is the way it is in the first place.”
..from BFP’s July 8, 2011 article re-printed below
Inconvenient Barbados Law changed for one man
Breaking news: August 18, 2011 1:17am
American “court referee” Marston Gibson told the Associated Press last night that he has accepted the post of Chief Justice of Barbados. He’s 57 and plans to stay until he’s 70, according to what he told the American newspapers. (Apparently Mr. Gibson is not even a full Judge as we’ve been told in the Barbados papers? Readers check the Wall Street Journal story at the end and weigh in please!)
Mr. Gibson hasn’t practiced law in Barbados or any Commonwealth country in decades if ever. We really don’t know because the background released by the government has been very slim. We all thought he was a real judge… apparently that might not be the case?
But it doesn’t really matter because Mr. Gibson’s appointment makes a big statement about the law and rule of law in Barbados. You see, the government announced months and months ago that Mr. Gibson was the choice – then it was found that he didn’t meet the test in our laws about having experience working in our system. It was a little embarrassing for the government, so they did the usual thing… they changed the law. Now there’s no problem. See?
The law means nothing on this rock. It is a tool, a weapon for the elites. If it doesn’t fit, they change the law. God forbid they should adhere to any law that gets in their way!
Revirginated Attorney General David Simmons became Chief Justice
So here we are just like last time when former Attorney General and Acting Prime Minister David Simmons decided he would like to be Chief Justice even if it removed the safety fences between the politicians and the judiciary. Heck, Simmons thought it was okay that he became the highest judge in the land while cases were still before the courts suing him while he was Attorney General. Ha! Nothing like being in charge of the entire judiciary when your own case is up before a court! What shite!
So welcome to our new Chief Justice Gibson. Don’t worry Mr. Gibson… you’ll be “Sir Marston” soon because that’s the way things are done ’bout hey. (Can this guy still find his way ’round B’town? Does he know where the new court is? Does he know our laws and our system? Hey… no problem: he can take on the job training.)
Meanwhile, Chief Justice Gibson: if you ever have to rule on an industrial action here in Barbados don’t be talking to me about me breaking the law or not qualifying for some government job: just change the job specs to match my qualifications, okay?
Same old, same old ’bout this place!
Previous article first published July 8, 2011…
If Marston Gibson loves Barbados, he will refuse the job
If Prime Minister Stuart loves Barbados he will not offer the job to Gibson
A few days ago the Barbados Government news agency announced that a new Chief Justice will be appointed by the first week in August. (See end of this post for the press release) The same press release quoted Prime Minister Freundel Stuart as saying that he never mentioned that New Yorker Marston Gibson is in the running.
That statement by Stuart is accurate – because he was never quoted personally in the press about appointing Gibson as the next Chief Justice.
But Stuart’s statement also communicates a big lie – because back in March, Freundel Stuart himself voted to pass an amendment to the Supreme Court of Judicature Act that was aimed at no other end result than appointing Gibson.
If you don’t understand how a statement can be 100% accurate and still communicate a lie, well then you haven’t been around lawyers all that much. It cannot be argued that our Prime Minister is not a politician in every negative meaning of the word. Continue reading →