Gleaner Editorial Assails DPP Makes No Mention Of Pusey’s Outrageous Decision

DPP Paula Llewelyn
DPP Paula Llewelyn

The Editorial Page of Monday March 31st with great clar­i­ty shows why peo­ple can­not depend on tra­di­tion­al Media Houses for cred­i­ble infor­ma­tion and rea­son­able news com­men­tary. The Publication’s attempt to dis­cred­it the Director of Public Prosecution amount­ed to not much more than a dis­as­trous witch-hunt.

1) Editorial Points con­tra­dict­ing… well the Editorial points.

For while we accept, and insist on, and avail our­selves of the right that the judi­cia­ry can­not be above ques­tion­ing and crit­i­cism, we feel that Ms Llewellyn should take stock.

2) Ms Llewellyn has made it clear that had she the right of appeal, as is now being pro­posed for some cir­cum­stances in Jamaica, she would. That’s well enoughBut Ms Llewellyn, unless we mis­in­ter­pret her utter­ances, has done more, and gone too far.

3) To be sure, despite her attempt to couch her crit­i­cisms of RM Pusey’s dis­agree­ment based on law, tone and con­text betray some­thing deep­er, we sus­pect. For instance, when an inter­view­er jux­ta­posed the out­comes of the Spencer-Wright case and the guilty ver­dict in the Vybz Kartel mur­der tri­al, plac­ing the dif­fer­ent deci­sions in the con­text of class and argued that jus­tice in Jamaica was on tri­al, Ms Llewellyn agreed that “jus­tice was not served” in the Spencer-Wright decision.

4) Then there was the tele­vi­sion dis­cus­sion pro­gram in which Ms Llewellyn pur­sued her belief that the mag­is­trate had made an error in the law, which is a posi­tion she is enti­tled to hold and declare. What was dis­con­cert­ing, unless we mis­ap­pre­hend­ed her intent, was the DPP’s ref­er­ence to two cas­es on which Ms Pusey had returned guilty ver­dicts but was over­ruled at appeal. That appeared to us, cir­cuitous though the effort may have been, a ques­tion­ing of Judith Pusey’s com­pe­tence as a magistrate.

Unlike the DPP and judges of the Supreme and appeal courts, mag­is­trates do not have secu­ri­ty of tenure. There is no require­ment for the con­ven­ing of high tri­bunals to remove them from office. In that regard, if the DPP believes that Ms Pusey is judi­cial­ly incom­pe­tent, or worse, she should, and can, prop­er­ly raise the mat­ter with the chief jus­tice so that the applic­a­ble civ­il-ser­vice reg­u­la­tions be acti­vat­ed and the appro­pri­ate deci­sions arrived at. http://​jamaica​-glean​er​.com/

There was a time when this Publication was respect­ed in our coun­try and the greater Caribbean region . That time has passed . Like every­thing else in Jamaica the stan­dard of Journalism and Editorial objec­tiv­i­ty once expect­ed has dis­s­a­peared down the gut­ter of ghet­toiza­tion , sac­ri­ficed on the altar of polit­i­cal expe­di­en­cy. No men­tion of the fact that a sim­ple project ‚intend­ed to dis­trib­ute free light bulbs donat­ed by the Cubans to Jamaicans was turned into a cash pot for one mem­ber of Parliament. No ques­tions asked about where Kern Spencer and his so-called assis­tant got all that mon­ey they deposit­ed into their accounts on suc­ceed­ing days to buy high end SUV . No ques­tions or men­tion of the fact that a sin­gle mis­guid­ed Magistrate hijacked the process and allowed anoth­er politi­cian to go free despite the evi­dence. Why would the Editorial page ask these ques­tions? It can’t ‚because it was the very same news­pa­per which sold the peo­ple on this incom­pe­tent Party in pow­er head­ed by the chief incom­pe­tent, Portia Simpson Miller. This Publication has demon­strat­ed it is no longer rel­e­vant on top­i­cal issues. It’s views now are exact­ly the das­tard­ly views com­ing out of Jamaica House. It is a sad day that a once proud Publication like the Gleaner would sur­ren­der its Journalistic excel­lence to become part of a ghet­to cult. It is a sad day when a Publication would side with those who do harm to the peo­ple, then have the gall to attack those who speak on behalf of the people.

%d