Rules of governance do matter

Wilberne Persaud, Financial Gleaner Columnist

The Gleaner, through Jamaica's Access to Infor-mation Act, unearthed emails revealing previously 'secret' communication between Solicitor General Douglas Leys and Manatt, Phelps & Phillips in the matter of the Christopher Coke extradition request.

These establish previous explanations of contacts at variance with truth, leading to calls for Leys' scalp. Similar disbelief and scepticism attach to Prime Minister Golding's statements.

Influential groups have called for him to go - grave developments with far reaching implications. How did we get here?

Douglas Leys was preferred over Stephen Vasciannie for the solicitor general position. Vasciannie was, apparently, personally unacceptable to the prime minister because of comments made upon Golding's exit from the National Democratic Movement (NDM) - the party he led upon leaving the Jamaica Labour Party - to return to the said JLP.

Golding had abandoned the JLP feeling he'd be confined to the leadership waiting room until past his prime. He'd never have a chance to be prime in prime time! But that was not the reason advanced for the move - justification was made of loftier stuff.

Separation of powers, the need to bury 'garrison politics' and other excellent objectives Jamaica might still need were advanced in the NDM platform of desiderata.

Subsequent decisions make a mockery of all these previous pronouncements, issued while standing atop the moral high ground.

Outcomes of these decisions highlight and underscore the fact that rules of good governance do matter. Veer from them whimsically at your peril. But is this so generally in Jamaica? If not, why not?

The prime minister fired the independent commission that selected Vasciannie and had Leys appointed. Leys previously served for many years as an assistant to former Solicitor General, Kenneth Rattray.

Savvy observers figured Rattray was grooming him as successor. He regularly accompanied Rattray to meetings. When Rattray was unavailable, Leys represented him in situations involving complex negotiations and law - this to my certain knowledge.

Based on encounters with both men, I would readily and convincingly argue that Leys could do the job. I would, too, say the same of Vasciannie, whom I know well and who was once my student. Of course, in a selection process, other matters, to which we are not privy, are considered.

Be that as it may, there was naked political intervention in naming Leys to the post. The issue became not whether he was competent and could do the job, which he certainly can, but the process. Did that process compromise Mr Leys?

It is clear to me Leys knew the discussion and activities indicated in the Manatt email series were improper. He has been student and practitioner of the law for too many years, sat at the feet of a 'Master Craftsman' for too long not to know!

His legal advice to himself should have been one word: disengage.

One word, too, to the Government of Jamaica: desist.

Yet he did not so advise. Why? Was it that he changed hats and saw himself as part-time political and diplomatic adviser? Did he believe it had become impossible to speak truth to power or had he come to view his position as serving his political masters in what they considered to be their interest, all the time relying on a recklessly foolhardy notion that these activities could remain secret?

This was catastrophic failure of judgement; mind-boggling and not easily understood. How could one believe of all things, that engaging a US lobbyist for a foreign entity, whether political party or government, to intercede with the United States government could remain secret?

This is like depositing the smoking gun in a hermetically sealed transparent glass tube incompletely wrapped in toilet tissue, signed for and left with the cloakroom clerk.

As for the prime minister, it is not in the political DNA that we have evolved in the Caribbean since self-government to resign. So I guess, barring unexpected catastrophe, we will have the JLP government as constituted until the next election is called.

They should, however, truly take stock of what it is they do and try to govern according to the official playbook, difficult as that may seem. The stock of goodwill that existed is surely depleted or in negative territory.

In the meantime, our loyal Opposition has learnt that the Jamaican proverb is oh so powerful and real: 'Same knife that stick goat, stick sheep!'

Meantime, civil society takes heed of Edmund Burke: "All that is required for triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

Cricketers must accept the umpire's verdict even when wrong; politicians replace the umpire, particularly when right. Even Burke would agree, though, that ordinary men and women who can't be replaced must become the ultimate umpires!

Our rules embody this. Yet we breach them in application.

Take heart, Contractor General.

 wilbe65@yahoo.com