Another Diplomatic Embarrassment
For the second time in just about 3 months, this country is put in the position of another episode of diplomatic embarrassment.
At a recent OAS meeting, in contradiction to the common position of our Caricom partners, the Trinidad and Tobago objected to hurricane ravaged Dominica’s request for a 2-year waiver of its fees to that organization.
There was an immediate gasp of horror and condemnation of our country’s position nationally, regionally and further afield.
This week, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement suggesting that the TT position stated at the OAS meeting was “not aligned with the actions, policy or orientation of Trinidad and Tobago towards Dominica.”
If this country’s position presented by its representative at an hemispheric body is “not aligned to our country’s actions, policy or orientation”, then whose position was it?
No ambassador or representative at such bodies acts on important matters like this without direction of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
But, obviously embarrassed, that Ministry is now investigating “the briefing arrangements of TT’s representatives at the OAS meeting”.
What are they saying?

• The Ministry or Minister did not brief the delegation? 
• The Ministry’s briefing was “taken out of context?
• The delegation acted as reengades and took this country’s diplomacy into their own hands?

Whatever the excuse that will emerge, the fact is that this country’s diplomacy for the second time in just three months has embarrassed us as a nation.
No amount of blaming and shaming or apologies to the people of Dominica or the region will solve the problem.

2 Blows in 3 Months
On December 21 last year, at the United Nations, when the world took a stand against the US provocation of recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and Trump’s decision to relocate the US Embassy there, the TT representative abstained.  
That was a blot on our country’s proud record in the UN and otherwise by the positions we have taken in opposing the US embargo on Cuba, on Apartheid and other issues. Such was our prestige in global affairs that our small country sat at the UN Security Council and had the respect of others, large and small.
We distinguished ourselves in the region when in 1983, we refused to join other regional nations in egging on the US in its military intervention in Grenada.
In the UN and now in the OAS, our diplomatic record is dealt two heavy blows.
Whether the Foreign Affairs investigation blames any individual for this latest embarrassment, it is clear that this is further evidence of the abyss in to which our society and its governance is rapidly descending.

Necessity for Democratic Renewal
In these times of degeneration in social order, one feature that is emerging is the tendency to suggest that the military can rescue the day for failing governance.
In the US and other countries, the Cabinet and top Executive positions are increasingly being populated with military men on the assumption that they are disciplined and will bring “order”.
In our own Government, there are several such ex-military or quasi-military persons, including in our diplomatic corps.
The Trump White House and administration has already demonstrated the fallacy of this notion of superior organizational and governance capability of the military personnel.
Our Governance needs renewal on a democratic basis.
Empowering the body politic in decision-making to favour the interests of the majority is vital to putting an end to this all-round degeneration.
The collapse in our social structure reflected in the collapse of our institutions, in rampant criminality, corruption and social and moral decay can only be ended with Democratic Renewal of our social and political processes – our Governance arrangements.
 
Clyde Weatherhead
A Citizen Fighting for Democratic
Renewal of our Society
 
March 31, 2018

The present administration has refused to accept responsibility for the total collapse of the seabridge and the hardship being experienced by the people of both islands as their Right to Reliable Transportation between the islands is absolutely disregarded.
It is now 2 full weeks that there has been no passenger ferry service on the seabridge and the spokespersons of the PNM contemptuously declare that the people of Tobago are not suffering.
Well, let the so-called representative of the people of Tobago East and the entire Cabinet and PNM party tell those 60 or so citizens who had to jump from one vessel to the other without any bridge or handrail in the middle of the ocean after 6:00 p.m. yesterday that they did not suffer.
The Transport Minister, in contemptuous and dismissive style of his Cabinet colleagues described the fire and shutting down of the water taxi as a “little mishap”.

Why Were Passengers on a Water Taxi?
Since the intermittent and then total collapse of the TT Express and the passenger ferry service, in and out of Parliament, the Transport and Finance Ministers were almost boastful in their assurances that “CAL was picking up the slack”.
As if they were guaranteeing the people’s Right to Transportation, on March 13, Sinanan told the media that “everyone booked to sail to Tobago on the TT Express would be accommodated on Caribbean Airlines until the seabridge is operational.”.
 On March 22, Imbert told the Parliament “Caribbean Airlines was able to handle all ferry passengers within its existing capacity.”
In the same Parliament meeting he confirmed the falsehood of that statement when he went on to state that “US$560,000 (about TT$3.9 million) will be spent on the Tobago airbridge until the end of April to wet-lease aircraft from LIAT.”.
If CAL could “handle all ferry passengers WITHIN ITS EXISTING CAPACITY”, why was nearly $4M being spent to wet-lease more aircraft to carry the ferry passengers?

• Why, on March 27 were ferry passengers being transported on a Water Taxi and NOT on CAL or the wet-leased LIAT aircraft at all?
• Why was this happening in March when the wet-lease is till the end of April?

Didn’t the Government assure the public that CAL was doing a magnificent job of picking up the slack?
 
The State Must Give a Guarantee to the People’s Rights
This dangerous situation created by the shut down of the water taxi last night and the absence of proper safety measures for the transfer of passengers ship-to-ship was TOTALLY UNNECESSARY.
The Government and its agencies are fully aware that Easter and Tobago Jazz are high traffic periods for passengers between the islands. Otherwise they would not have spent $4M to wet-lease an aircraft for the airbridge till the end of April.
But, despite knowing the need for more capability, in abject failure of their duty to give a guarantee to the people’s Right to Transportation and Safety, passengers were put on a water taxi instead of on the airbridge.
Despite the fact that passengers were taken back to Tobago and forced to complete their journey more that 12 hours later, the Chief Secretary and the THA have been conspicuous in their silence.
The so-called representatives of the people in the THA and in the Parliament have demonstrated their utter disregard for the rights of the people.
As the students of Parkland have been loud in declaring, in the wake of the killing of 17, it is not enough to talk, ACTION is required.
The people of both Tobago and Trinidad must stand up and say Enough is Enough.
All must demand that the state and Government give them a guarantee to their rights to Transport and Safety and take action to ensure that that is done.
 
Clyde Weatherhead
A Citizen Fighitng for Democratic Renewal
Of our Society
 
March 28, 2018

Call for Presidential Intervention:
                     Careful What You Ask For
Undoubtedly enthused by the possibility of an interventionist/proactive Presidency after Monday’s inaugural address, the Prison Officers Association (POA) has given the 6th President of the Republic her “first assignment”.
Speaking on the issue of ongoing disciplinary process against 3 Prison Officers facing disciplinary charges in connection with a dramatic and fatal jailbreak in 2015, the president of the POA called on the Her Excellency to “intervene, look into and take action”.
He has, on another occasion, called on Her Excellency to “bring some form of resolution to the ongoing saga of the 2015 jailbreak”.
The reason for his exasperated call is what he described as “unconstitutional action” by the Public Service Commission in failing to disclose any investigator’s report or the name of the accuser in relation to the officers before a disciplinary tribunal on serious charges.
​
Fair Disciplinary Procedure
In the public service, of which the Prison Service is a part, public officers against whom allegations are made are first entitled to have the allegations investigated by an investigating officer appointed by an authorised officer within the service.
Depending on the circumstances and the seriousness of the allegations, the officer may be suspended or interdicted (required not to perform his duties) with or without a reduction in pay.
The investigating officer is required to submit a report of his findings within a specified timeframe. This report is submitted to the relevant Service Commission which shall lay disciplinary charges against the officer if the investigation warrants same.
The disciplinary charge or charges with sufficient detail of the allegations on which each charge is based so that the officer charged would know precisely what he is accused of.
A disciplinary tribunal is appointed to hear the evidence and find the facts and report its findings to the Commission, which determines the innocence or guilt of the officer and the appropriate penalty, where necessary.
This disciplinary procedure is governed by regulations of the Service Commission and is designed to ensure fairness, natural justice and protection of the rights of the officer accused.
These requirements of fairness and justice are often mistakenly believed to make disciplinary action against impossible. That is not the case.

The Case of the Three Officers
In this case of the 3 Prison Officers, who remain on suspension, are before a disciplinary tribunal to answer the charges against them.
Natural justice demands that they must have sufficient details in order to know precisely the case they must answer.
The POA’s complaint is that those details are not being provided denying their right to natural justice.
At the same time, it is now almost 3 years and the tribunal hearing is making little or no headway. Justice delayed is justice denied.
While claiming that the Service Commission is acting unconstitutionality, they are also inviting the intervention of the President.
It may be useful for the POA to carefully consider the implications of their call for Presidential intervention in a disciplinary matter or in the administrative affairs of the public service.
Firstly, the President has NO role in the disciplinary procedure in the public service outlined above.
Secondly, the Service Commission is accountable to a JSC of the Parliament, not the President.
Powers you think she has, she does not.
What ‘action’ does the Association expect the President to take?
Should the President respond positively to the Association’s call and get involved in the disciplinary process perceivably in the assistance of the accused officers, what is she to do?
What would prevent other Presidential incursions in such proceedings in the future and possibly in a manner not of assistance to others facing disciplinary charges?
There would have been good reason why the 5th President did not involve that office before.
If there is any breach of Constitutional rights or any unfairness or injustice in the process, those are matters that the Courts are fully capable and authorised to pronounce on.
The POA needs to be very careful what they are asking for.
 
Clyde Weatherhead
23 March 2018