​Presidential Inauguration –
Unveiling the Crisis of Politics in This Land

​Yesterday, TSTT’s denial of my tv service for the 11th day afforded me the opportunity to witness the inauguration of our 6th President and Head of State in the company of my neighbours.
The inauguration of the 5th I had witnessed in the comfort of my own home and as I sat in the good company of fellow community members this time, listening to the speech of the new incumbent, it struck me of the similarity of their speeches.
Despite the difference in gender, the content of the inaugural addresses in 2013 and 2018 (March 18 and 19 respectively) was uncannily so much the same.
The reception of the “new” President and their beautiful words was also, bar intensity, very much the same.
In 2013, the applause appeared louder to my recollection. But, the enthusiasm, the ‘audacity of hope’ as Obama put it, was no less.
“This speech sounds like “Powers you think I Have” part 2”, I remarked to my hosts at one point. “You find so?” was the response.
The sameness – of the speeches and the immediate response – suggested to me that our people by now very cynical in their view of the possibilities of our political representatives and other officeholders have reposed anticipation of one last possibility in the Office of the President.  
It did not matter in 2013 that it was a male and in 2018 a female. Here was “the President” and despite the deficiencies in the job specification of the highest office, despite that it is well known that the position is ‘highly ceremonial’, still the crisis of our Governance, the loss of legitimacy of our political arrangements have left many with desire that ‘maybe this one, yes this one will make the difference”.

The Inaugural Speeches
Let us examine some of what was said in  2013 and in 2018, scan some of the points made.
March 18, 2013:
 “My fellow citizens: It would be otiose, on the occasion, to attempt to engage you in a discussion on Constitutional Law. I do want to emphasise, however, that I am not an Executive President. Under the Westminster form of governance, there are parameters within which I must operate. Powers you think I have... I do not. Powers you think I do not have... I do.”
“I may not have a magic wand, but the Office of the Presidency is not impotent.”
March 19, 2018:
“Well before the date of assumption of any new position the candidate had better be clear about the job description, …. with that in mind I first looked at the Constitution and while it outlined certain duties and functions of president, the office holder’s role was not defined.
“This unscientific research led me to the conclusion that it falls to each President to define within prescribed limits his or in this case her own role.”
March 18, 2013:
“The mandate of my Presidency will be to infuse new life into the watchwords Discipline/Production/Tolerance.”
March 19, 2018:
“After much deliberation I identified my role as “humble first servant” with the mandate to render service with enthusiasm.”
March 18, 2013:
“I have listened quickly, but with some trepidation, to the well-intentioned national discussion on the role and responsibilities by the President of the Republic……..
“I am humbled by the abundance of goodwill that I have received; but I am ever mindful that goodwill can be nebulous and can dissipate if expectations are not realised or not realised expeditiously.”
March 19, 2018:
“Friends, Trinbagonians, Countrymen, I have listened carefully to all that you have said following my election
“Your high expectations indicate to me that there is a mustard seed of faith that things can get better in our twin-island republic”
March 18, 2013:
“The second watchword "Production" is a call for us to re-examine our work ethic; to demand a fair day's pay but, at the same time, to commit to giving a fair day's work; to search out law opportunities to be less dependent on the State; to distinguish between service and servitude; and to ensure that in any and all areas of endeavours, the goods and services that we offer are second to none.”
March 19, 2018:
“….you can be a light in your workplace, get to work on time, actually do work while you are there and go the extra mile if need be.”
March 18, 2013:
“I believe that we need to re-discover our destiny of creating hope for a world in turmoil.”
March 19, 2018:
“None of us is blind or foolish enough to deny that Trinidad and Tobago is going through dark times,
“….it is my mission, mission entirely possible, to infect each and every one of you with a bright and positive spirit as we strive to turn our beloved nation into what it ought to have been and still can be.
So let us today choose Option 2 confront the darkness and declare that it will not take over.”
March 18, 2013:
“I say this because I know that, with the appropriate support, these young persons are fully capable of acting in a responsible manner, fully capable of being accountable. Let me give you three examples.
March 19, 2018:
“Let us not miss the relevance and timeliness of one of our nationals, Len Peters, being awarded in February this year the first Commonwealth Points of Light Award ….. Recognise too, Gabrielle Branche who won an award from the United World Colleges for an innovative project targeting secondary schools in Trinidad and Tobago.
“Even in the midst of the relentless assault on our sensibilities as individuals and as a nation, every day we can find shining examples of all that is good about us. Search them out, encourage and support them in order to spread the glow.”
March 18, 2013:
“We are good at sound bites and labeling. We can be excellent wordsmiths. But if we are to establish a better, more progressive, more humane society, real change must be invoked.
“And this is particularly true when the change envisioned threatens our sense of who we are as individuals or as members of a distinct group; when that change exposes strongly-held biases and prejudices as myths --- myths that constrain our capacity for empathy, promoting instead narrow group loyalties, that serve only to deny us the magic of community, to steal from us the courage and the wisdom that are the principal building blocks of this small and complex nation we call Trinidad and Tobago.”
March 19, 2018:
“Next, I ask those of you with a platform from which to disseminate your views to find new and creative ways to inspire your audience while reporting responsibly and commenting civilly on the facts and in particular on social media which is here to stay and has great value in giving a voice to those who might otherwise be voiceless…..”
“Is it at all possible to dial down the rhetoric while still adding your 2 cents’ worth to the discussion on any issue?”
March 18, 2013:
“I consider myself fortunate to have been raised by no less than five villages! Let me hasten to add, this was not because I was a difficult child. But the circumstances that occasioned these frequent changes of residence did broaden my sense of community and expand the body of exemplars whose influence has been so critical in determining the direction of life.”
March 19, 2018:
“I do not now nor have I ever lived in an ivory tower nor worn blinkers. I may have had some advantages that others have not……
“In closing, I thank God for his mercies … for me the boundary lines have fallen in pleasant places, I have a goodly heritage.”
The similarities may seem uncanny.
There is no allusion to plaigarisation or any ill intent.
The speakers have acknowledged their common concern to respond to the great expectations placed on them by a population thirsting for a different leadership, even from those whom they do not elect themselves.
Those who the electors have indeed elected are proving to be ‘representing’ something or someone else, but not the those who have elected them.
Representative democracy has failed to deliver Representation of the Interest of the Majority. So, even in an office in which the majority have no voting rights, the unrepresented place their hope for some relief for a ‘higher order’ of service to themselves – those who make up the nation.
And those thrust into that position, though not having powers that the majority think or more correctly HOPE that someone other than those who have failed them may have, have the burden of expectation placed on them.
Their recognition of that reality is reflected in the similarity of the content of their words on entering into that office.

Another Episode of Hope for a Different Outcome
Taking note of the resuscitated hope placed in another holder of the position, this time with the added sense of achievement on the part of half the population that the elevation of a woman elicits, I conducted my own “unscientific research” to borrow Her Excellency’s words.
I posted on social media with a phot of our 6th President a brief message as follows:
“Welcome Madame President. 
The real hope is that beyond the 'feel good' moment of the installation of the first woman to this office, there will emanate from the office some things that contribute to:

• the improvement in our country's Governance,
• the satisfaction of the needs of our citizens,
• guaranteeing the safety and security of All by guarantee of the Rights of All and
• the humanizing of our natural and social environments. 

In a position that the 6th President describes as being without definition of "its job specification"; Everything or Nothing is possible. 
Let's see how the role gets defined.”
I hoped and received many responses by way of comment and likes.
The Likes I understand as that “feel good” light evoked by the sense of achievement of another woman.
The Comments reflect the Hope placed in the holder of the Office and more. See some of them:

• Power to all the women in Trinidad and Tobago who is stepping up in the game first president female president female prime minister poem these two women
• Women do bring a naturally less incorruptible and motherly approach to situations. It is my hope that it works out well and the citizens expectations are generally met.
• Congrats to our new lady President that was an awesome first speech. You are definitely an inspiration to us all. We need someone who will inspire hope in our people. May the good Lord continue to inspire and keep you in His loving embrace we will be praying for you to be able to keep the positive vibes going.
• May the all mighty GOD Guide you my LADY
• May all your decisions redound to benefits of our people
• Congratulations Madame President. Stand for TRUTH always.
• An impressive first speech. Let's look for consistency. We need it. Congratulations to you, Madame President. Our Nation lives in hope.
• Congratulations on her appointment i wish her well her speech was excellent. 
  I do hope that she gets her Independence to function as President having regards to the attitude of the behaviour of this present how they are governing this country and the state we are in at the moment. Our President means well for Trinidad and Tobago. 
  I also like many other wish Former President Anthony Carmona and his family well it was not an easy 5 years for him.
• It is great to see another person break the glass ceiling.
• I hope she can lift the spirit of the nation throughout her term(s).
• Congratulations and welcome Madame president. May the Almighty give you the wisdom, determination and strength necessary to fulfil your mission.
• WE must be the wind beneath her wings.
• Congratulations Madame President. Hoping you can orchestrate change.
• Not sure how much change she can orchestrate tbh.
• Hope She performs better than Carmona for the sake of T&T. I presume She will be stuck with the mess with the CJ. and Carmona.
• Waste of time .....main purpose of the President beside walking around looking nice? Madame President you're an inert

These responses reflect a more cautious optimism than in 2013, the lower decibel level of the adulation for the speech reflecting the reality of experience teaching the hard truth: Powers you Think I have, I Do Not.
The Office, its functions and duties defined in the Constitution of the Republic have not changed. Both in 2013 and 2018 the incumbents have warned that they ‘define the role’ but, “there are parameters within which I must operate..” and “within prescribed limits” as both the 5th and 6th have admitted.
The officeholder changes; the office does not.
The words, appeasing expectation, suggest, I will do it “my way”.
What is always to be seen after is: Will Words be turned into Deeds?
Should that not happen there is a new disappointment and the cynicism deepens and the desire for Real Representation and for a political order that finally recognizes the needs of the Majority grows.
The way to create that NEW Desired and Desirable Reality requires the leadership of those, not with office, but with the interest and aspirations of the Majority internalized, to step forward and provide the Leadership and Direction that the Necessity For Change requires.
 
 
Clyde Weatherhead
A Citizen Still Fighting for
Democratic Renewal of our Society
Tuesday, March 20, 2018

In the world of the Bollywood soap operas, the little games of intrigue and subterfuge played by one or other family member against others, the faking and gallerying of characters for the entertainment of the audience – all those are called “dramas”.
In this Strange Land, the Land of Mimic Men (as Rudder describes our twin isles) we also have our Tales (Dramas a la Bollywood).
Within the last 24 hours one has been played off in high places.
Here’s the script:
JC applies to and is granted Study Leave by Serp.
MP questions Serp about his authority to grant Study Leave; after all it will add cost overruns to the project.
JC (hearing of MP’s ‘consternation’) declares: I have opted to not proceed on Study Leave so no one is distracted from important project business.
I will use a portion of my vacation leave to do my studies.
I have 35 weeks unused vacation. So, I will use a portion of that. Forget the Study Leave.
MP (hearing of JC’s manouvre): I am going to the High Council for interpretation of this Study Leave thing yes.
And I telling Serp to make sure to follow the Collective Agreement article on Vacation Leave to the letter of the law when JC changes his application.
Serp (now confused by the whole goings on) contemplates his next move.
After approving JC’s 6-week vacation says: JC boy, enjoy your vacation. I leaving the project next week. By the time you come back all the consternation will be over. You going for more than 9 days so by the time you get back, the whole project team will be on to the third or fourth new issue.

Meanwhile back in the Strange Land
In announcing his change of leave character, the CJ said “I trust and pray that in my absence….the issue of LEGAL INTERPRETATION the 98th Report of the SRC will be ventilated and clarified…”.
The PM then makes a grand announcement “I have directed the AG to apply to the Court for and INTERPRETATION on the existence of Sabbatical Leave for Judges”.
Ping-Pong…..they both agree….Legal Interpretation next step.
But, the CJ says he is entitled to 35 weeks of ‘unutilized vacation’.
And, the PM says to the President just be careful to follow the law on Judges’ vacation.
Well, here’s what the law says – Vacation Entitlements – Justice of Appeal, to six weeks’ vacation per annum” – Reg. 6(1)(a) Judges Conditions of Service and Allowances) Regulations (No.2) and “The vacation provided for in subregulation(1) shall be taken at such time or times as may be approved by the Chief Justice and shall not be accumulated from one year to another” - Reg. 6(2) made under the Judges Salaries and Pensions Act Chapter 6:02 of the Laws of Trinidad and Tobago.
So, two things arise:

1. The CJ CANNOT have 35 weeks unutilized vacation
2. The President can grant a maximum of 6 weeks’ Vacation Leave to the CJ (a Justice of Appeal).

Back to the drama of this Tale in a Strange Land.
Just suppose, the CJ gets his 6 weeks’ vacation and off he goes.
The Government files its Interpretation Summons and the Court rules that there is NO Sabbatical Leave.
Then what?

• The CJ is not on illegal leave.
• The PM is happy he was right about the Sabbatical Leave.
• The CJ is happy the issue of Legal Interpretation of the 98th SRC Report is done.
• The President is happy…he has ridden off into the sunset
• The public, the media, the lawyers are left wondering – What about section 137??

And all live happily ever after in this Tale of a Strange Land where Life is a Stage and we are the audience...(sic)
Another day, another drama in the Saga of T&T.
After all the hullaballoo about ‘shaming the CJ out of office’; after all the gnashing of teeth “Trigger s.137 tribunal”; after all the ‘investigation/enquiry’ by the Law Association, where are we?
The issues that arose in the first place are buried in murky memory of a 9-day wonder.
We are all supposed to forget that among the allegations against the CJ were:
· Did the CJ interfere in the constitutional role of the Police in instructing the Police to cease their protection of Justice Seepersad?
· Did the CJ in a meeting with Judges or otherwise attempt to persuade them to change state-provided security in favour of a private company connected with his personal friend?
· Did the CJ intervene in the HDC allocation of housing on behalf of one or more of his personal friends?
The serious allegations which may have some foundation for raising the question of inability to perform the function of his office from ‘any other cause’ or for misbehavior – the ONLY grounds in s.137(1) of the Constitution for which the CJ can be removed from office get lost in the smoke and mirrors of the “Sabbatical Leave” Drama.
Once again, as Valentino told us 40 years ago…..Life is Ah Stage and We Are the Actors and Everybody Have a Part to Play…..Like Ah Never-ending Movie with All Different Characters…..
In this Strange Land, we would have all been brought into a noisy dramatic episode and the Actors on the stage of our “Governance” would have play their part in the never-ending movie for our entertainment, possibly amusement.
The only issue is that just like the “Sharma Affair”, this Drama would have left us NOTHING of VALUE for the improvement of our GOVERNANCE.
The Actors will feel happy with their performance.
The Audience leaves the theatre that we can never leave (like the Hotel California) and on to the next episode – very much heat generated, but STILL NO LIGHT.
If we never take ourselves and our society seriously, we will remain stuck in muck of colonial remnants of power and privilege posing as modern government.
On to the next tale – Welcome to disneyworld.tt.com.
Or will we write a NEW Script?
 
Clyde Weatherhead
March 15, 2018
I remain a Citizen Fighting for
Democratic Renewal of Our Society!

We Need Light, Not Just Heat
This is my second piece on the current toing and froing about the PM invoking s.137(3) of the Constitution by recommending to the President that a tribunal be set up to investigate charges against the Chief Justice and recommend his removal from office or otherwise.
In my first piece, I raised several questions concerning the Prime Minister’s role in the disciplinary process set out in section 137(3) and the basis for a decision by the PM to request the President to set up the tribunal.
Among my questions were:

• What “enquiry” is the PM required to make before making a similar request (for a tribunal) re. the CJ?
• Did the PM, in this present case, make any enquiry of the CJ or anyone else? Or, did he just decide, without any enquiry at all, that he would do nothing?
• Is it proper for the PM to request or not request a tribunal of the President, without himself doing some investigation of the matter to be able to satisfy the President that there is some preliminary level of proof of the CJ’s inability to perform his functions for reasons set out in s. 137(1)?
• Did the PM make any enquiry of the CJ or anyone else regarding these serious allegations?

As it turns out, I am not the first to ask these questions.
I did say that we had gone this way before with the Sharma impeachment (removal by s. 137 process) episode 14 years or so ago.
The PM’s Role Then and Now
It is good that so many commentaries were made on the “Sharma Affair” as it became known.
Dr. Selwyn Cudjoe, in a lecture at POS City Hall on February 17, 2005, titled “No Man Is Above the Law Let Justice Prevail” among other things had this to say:
“In his address to the Nation, the Prime Minister (Mr. Manning) made it very clear:
"According to the constitutional process, the Prime Minister must decide whether the question of removing the Chief Justice ought to be investigated.
Naturally, such a decision should be made only;
a) After a thorough examination of the issues is undertaken and
b)    If there is a serious enough case to answer.”
Cudjoe also said, “The Constitution allows the Prime Minister to collect the information and determine whether it should be sent on to the President.”
From these quotes, either PM Manning or Dr. Cudjoe or both answer my questions with a YES.
Yes, the PM must ‘thoroughly examine the issues” and must “decide if there is a serious enough case”.
Well, Mr. Manning went to the point in his examination, enquiry of writing to the CJ Sharma and asking him questions.
The PM was criticized by some for writing the CJ. But that was the position of commentators only.
What is the PM doing now in the present CJ Affair?
Here’s what PM Rowley told Parliament last Friday, “The only assurance I can give is that as Prime Minister, I’ll ensure that the responsibility of the Office of Prime Minister operates under the provisions of the Constitution and not calls being made by people who don’t understand the role of the Prime Minister and the provisions of the Constitution.”.
And, exactly what does that mean, Mr. PM?
Issues of s. 137 Itself
In my first piece, I raised questions of the inadequacies of s.137 of the Constitution itself.
I suggested that it did not sufficiently clarify the duty of investigation on the part of the PM or the President in the recommendations or decisions they each had to make.
In the Sharma Affair, the questions about s.137 went even further.
There are references even in a foreign journal published by Monroe College under the title - ATTACKS ON JUSTICE – TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO.
I quote from that article now:
“The conflict between the Prime Minister and CJ Sharma has prompted discussion on whether the Constitution ought to be amended to preclude Prime Ministers from initiating such actions in the future. Former President Sir Ellis Clarke has argued that it should be for the President, and not the Prime Minister, to decide whether to initiate impeachment proceedings as it was the former who appointed the CJ. In February 2005, ex-President Clarke and UNC leader Basdeo Panday called for an amendment to article 137 of the Constitution to be introduced to this effect as they consider the present system to be unfair.”.
Both one of the authors of the Constitution, Sir Ellis Clarke and a former PM advocated for the PM to have NO ROLE in s.137 at all to make the process fairer.
I continue to argue that s. 137 needs to be examined and any ambiguity or shortcoming, including the point made by these 2 former leaders of our country, must be the subject of Constitutional amendment.
If all we do is decide if to remove the CJ or not, and s.137 is left as it is, as a nation; for the sake of improving our governance arrangements we would have achieved very little or possibly nothing of real value for the future of our country.
Our Constitution would remain untouched. Our quality of Governance will remain in the 1960’s.
The “Archie Affair” will go down in history as a distant memory just like the “Sharma Affair” before it.
A lot of Heat, but NO Light!