JUSTICE SELECT COMMITTEE IN JERSEY PART 2 OR TWO THIRDS OF YOUR POLITICIANS DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT JUSTICE

 

If there is one thing that I have learnt in 5 years 'inside' Jersey politics it is that the more important to democracy and political transparency an issue is then the less likely it is to see most of the Great and the Good turn up to a meeting. This Monday's question and answer session held at the 'Societe Jersiaise' proved this disappointing phenomena to be true once again.

 

The States Assembly has 51 Members. Yet only 17 who had not had the benefit of a rumoured 80-odd pounds-per-head slap up meal at the Atlantic Hotel bothered to come along!

 

That there were no banana daiquiris or prawn cocktails really isn't any excuse...

 

Given that recent times have seen a staggering abuse of justice including manipulation of  the Data Protection Law about which no one could talk about upon threat of arrest - this resulting in 'top secret' court proceedings against a former politician.  The hijacking of the electoral reform process to cement inequality; not to forget exposes of Jurats happy to both disregard evidence against sickening paedophile friends and subsequently flout the rules to sit on cases where other mates were directly involved - when put under the spotlight this really can mean only one thing.

 

Most of  Jersey's elected representatives are either too scared to stand up for what should lie at the very core of every democracy in the world - or simply do not care a jot about justice in the first place So long, it would seem, as it doesn't impact on them personally. Frankly politicians falling into either category should be identified and hounded out of office before it is too late. In the first instance perhaps being forced to study the famous saying of Pastor Neimoller.

 

It would be embarrassing to raise any local justice issues with the Committee...

 

The order highlighted above, passed down from the apex of Gorst and Bailhache's Team Feudal, should have sent alarm bells ringing straightaway. Indeed, I actually sought out the 'ministerial aide' who had come out with this nonsense and pointed out the chances of my complying with this was on a par with Luis Suarez giving up snacking on defenders' arms.

 

Yet for all of these worries  I was still glad that I had gone along. Otherwise I would never have got to learn that, in voicing my concerns about the hard and undeniable facts that those who control Jersey 'justice' continue to sanction appalling abuses against those who are either not sufficiently wealthy; or dare rock the Establishment boat were not supported by the likes of Constables Juliette Gallichan and Phil Rondel.

 

Now no surprise when considering Constable Gallichan.  As she made quite clear only a few short weeks ago she was adamant that I definitely 'did not speak for her' in apologising to the tragic victim of abuse in the Dean suspension case, poor, vulnerable HG. But Constable Rondel? Whatever could have happened here? Only a couple of weeks ago he was telling me how he totally agreed that John Le Breton of Jervis-Dykes abuse case shame should NEVER have been allowed to become a Jurat (lay judge)*

Independence? No thank you!

Interestingly, Constable Rondel did speak at length about what he felt had been the bullying and unfair treatment of Jersey by the UK over the 'last 20 years'. A bit surprised by the 20 years statement many of us were. To most of us interested in justice the worst failing on the part of Westminster has been the policy of just turning a blind eye to abuses of justice and bad governance where they know they actually have an obligation to step in.

However, though having to qualify this with the observation that it was pretty foolish for any to set up and come to rely on an industry which was built on a tax loop-hole I do have some sympathy with Phil's views on Jersey's comparative singling out for action over LVCR.

Nevertheless, when the issue of 'independence' came up in the session the Constable and I part company. He expressed that it would be a good thing. Independence in my view would lead, within a decade or two, to financial and social ruin. It would also lead to political abuse of the 'justice' system on a truly terrifying scale due to the lack of ethics/morals on the part of those Establishment figures at the top who crave this unfettering of power desperately.

Indeed, I must say that I also found the Constable's expression of support for independence somewhat surprising given that both the 'Rondel Twins' in the States have expressed deep concerns about young James increasingly falling under the totalitarian spell of 'The Man Who Would Be King'.

 

Its our report - but you're paying for it all...

 

Another fact that had I not gone along I never would have known was that according to the Chairman, though the Committee was here to follow-up their 2010 report; the cost of everything involved was going to be down to the Jersey taxpayer.

No problem with that at all - so long as the Committee actually don't buy into the Gorst and Bailhache propaganda and do what they are meant to do: i.e. listen to the concerns of Jersey people and those handful of politicians, Shona Pitman, me, Mike Higgins and Montfort Tadier brave enough to tell the truth.

 

And I'm afraid this also means treating the appalling abuse of justice that continues to allow an unelected judge lord it as 'president' of the States with the same commitment to 21st century reform that Westminster has forced upon to Sark. The 'dual role' of the Jersey Bailiff, after all, as has been pointed out by eminent local lawyer, Philip Sinel is far, far worse.

 

What exactly had the Committee been fed at the Atlantic? (no pun intended!)

 

I posit the question because until the above facts were pointed out by Shona, we were initially getting the fob off that discarding the anachronism of the Bailiff was down to the people and the States. Non recognition or understanding seemed apparent of the insidious structuring of the generations old 'Jersey Way.

 

It was even suggested that the Committee had been given no examples where the two conflicting roles overlapped from justice into the political. Fortunately I was able to intervene and  use the recent example of a Bailiff quickly putting on his 'Head of the Legislature' hat to stop a personal statement strongly criticising him in his wearing of his other hat as 'Head of the Judiciary'.

 

The examples given to the Committee flowed after this with the pointing out of how the propaganda they had received from the likes of Gorst, Bailhache and co of there being no problematic overlap was errant and dangerous nonsense. The Chief Judge could stop an elected member speaking; he could block perfectly legitimate questions; he could let Ministers get away with stonewalling and waffling to ride out question time. Et cetera...

 

A light in the darkness...

 

Perhaps most encouraging of all was that eventually the Committee finally conceded that the plethora of hugely varied abuses of justice that Deputy Mike Higgins and I were now working on probably did fall within the UK Justice Select Committee's mandate.

 

Yes, even my and Shona's own attempted shafting via failures within the monitoring of the jurat system of which the Jersey Evening Pravda and Broadlands are keeping so manfully silent about in the hope of getting away with a beneficial ruling that would be laughed out of court in North Korea on Human Rights grounds.

 

The above recognition was actually voiced by the Rt. Hon. Elfyn Llwyd M.P. who a number of us agreed, though not talking as much as his colleagues actually seemed to have a better grasp of the subtle but hugely important issues at stake here. Which was probably just as well.

 

For Deputy Sean Power - though being at great pains to tell us that he totally respected yours truly, Shona, Mike Higgins and Montfort Tadier for the huge amount of work we do on behalf of people told the Committee that he felt in voicing our concerns about injustice we spoke for only 'a small number of people' who shared those views!

 

You can still have a say - make sure that you do!

 

Still, for all of that the session did end on a positive note. Under pressure from Shona the Committee's Chairman, Sir Alan Beith, did agree that submissions which had had a cut off date of the 10th May could now be sent to the Justice Select Committee right up until the 10th of July instead. Send them to this address:

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/justice-committee/inquiries/crown-dependencies-2013/cdd2010/

 

If you care about justice and putting an end to Jersey's 'justice' system and our 'Law' Office instead using the legal apparatus to enforce political and economic oppression please make 30 minutes in your schedule to send them an e-mail. I haven't yet I confess. But busy as I always am, and as so many of you will be PLEASE ensure that you now do. Our future might depend on it...

 

Keep the Faith