JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Friday, February 28, 2025

Judiciary staff working in pandemic mode until new admin directives issued

by

1089 days ago
20220307

The Ju­di­cia­ry says its staff will con­tin­ue to op­er­ate as they have been dur­ing the pan­dem­ic, in­clu­sive of vir­tu­al op­er­a­tions and ser­vice pro­vi­sion, un­til new ad­min­is­tra­tive arrange­ments are is­sued, fol­low­ing the Prime Min­is­ter’s re­cent an­nounce­ment of the re­turn of pub­lic ser­vants to work as nor­mal on Mon­day March 7th.

An of­fi­cial state­ment is­sued by the Ju­di­cia­ry in re­sponse to news re­ports and com­men­tary in the pub­lic do­main, ac­knowl­edges that it did is­sue an in­ter­nal email to staff in­di­cat­ing the in­struc­tion to con­tin­ue op­er­at­ing as per usu­al, un­til new arrange­ments have been put in place.

Ac­cord­ing to the Ju­di­cia­ry’s re­lease:

“It should be not­ed that any ad­just­ments which the Ju­di­cia­ry’s ad­min­is­tra­tion would have wished to put in place could not have been ready for March 7, 2022 and staff were sim­ply ad­vised to con­tin­ue to work as they have been do­ing and await fur­ther in­struc­tions.”

The fol­low­ing is the full text of the state­ment from the Ju­di­cia­ry…

Ju­di­cia­ry Clar­i­fies Mis­con­cep­tions Re. Ju­di­cia­ry Em­ploy­ees and March 7, 2022

The Ju­di­cia­ry wish­es to re­fer to a news re­port car­ried on TV6 on the evening of March 5, 2022 in which a mem­ber of the bench pur­port­ed­ly called in­to ques­tion what she con­sid­ered the Ju­di­cia­ry’s over­rid­ing of the di­rec­tive of the Prime Min­is­ter that all pub­lic ser­vants are ex­pect­ed to re­turn to work as nor­mal on March 7, 2022.  An in­ter­nal Ju­di­cia­ry e-mail of March 4, 2022 was al­so shown in the news re­port, in which the e-mail ad­vised staff:

“…that on Mon­day 7th March, 2022 your cur­rent work arrange­ments con­tin­ue un­til you hear from your su­per­vi­sors who will ad­vise you of changes to your work arrange­ments”.

The Ju­di­cia­ry is there­fore placed in a po­si­tion where it needs to quell pub­lic dis­qui­et which is oc­ca­sioned by an un­for­tu­nate mis­in­ter­pre­ta­tion of its in­struc­tion to staff. It has­tens to in­di­cate that the Ju­di­cia­ry func­tions on the ba­sis of Prac­tice Di­rec­tions and Rules of Court which are is­sued af­ter in-depth con­sid­er­a­tion.  

The Prime Min­is­ter did not is­sue a di­rec­tive to the Ju­di­cia­ry nor did the Ju­di­cia­ry at any time think that he did.

There is clear sep­a­ra­tion be­tween the Leg­is­la­ture, the Ex­ec­u­tive and the Ju­di­cia­ry which the heads of these arms of the State are aware of and ob­serve and no di­rec­tive was giv­en to the lat­ter.

In the past the Ju­di­cia­ry has al­ways tak­en the na­tion­al en­vi­ron­ment in­to con­sid­er­a­tion and craft­ed its Prac­tice Di­rec­tions and Rules of Court in such a way as to take in­to ac­count what­ev­er health or oth­er mea­sures are ef­fect­ed by the Ex­ec­u­tive, while en­sur­ing that the con­sid­er­a­tions which are unique to the Ju­di­cia­ry and its op­er­a­tions are ad­dressed.

The Ju­di­cia­ry is go­ing through the same process on this oc­ca­sion.

The Prime Min­is­ter has stat­ed that the coun­try is about to tran­si­tion from strate­gies to han­dle COVID 19 as a pan­dem­ic to those re­quired to see it as en­dem­ic.

As head of the Ex­ec­u­tive the Prime Min­is­ter has in­di­cat­ed, as he is prop­er­ly re­quired to do, how the ex­ec­u­tive should func­tion, and the Ju­di­cia­ry will now de­ter­mine how it must func­tion. This will be con­veyed in the form of Rules of Court, Prac­tice Di­rec­tions or both.

It should be not­ed that any ad­just­ments which the Ju­di­cia­ry’s ad­min­is­tra­tion would have wished to put in place could not have been ready for March 7, 2022 and staff were sim­ply ad­vised to con­tin­ue to work as they have been do­ing and await fur­ther in­struc­tions. 

The req­ui­site Prac­tice Di­rec­tion would have had to be pre­pared and in-depth ad­min­is­tra­tive arrange­ments made.  The is­sue was not on­ly about staff go­ing to cour­t­hous­es but about the wide range of Ju­di­cia­ry stake­hold­ers who would be af­fect­ed by any de­ci­sion tak­en. The op­er­a­tions of the Ju­di­cia­ry re­quire ap­pro­pri­ate plan­ning.

The above pro­vides the facts of what has oc­curred in the Ju­di­cia­ry since March 4, 2022 and brings clo­sure to any ef­fort at mis­in­form­ing the pub­lic about its ac­tions.

JudiciaryCOVID-19Health


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored