Who is popular today?

POSSIBLE “pillow talk” between a husband and his wife has been raised as a complaint against the judge presiding over the TT Revenue Authority (TTRA) constitutional challenge.
Justice Betsy Ann Lambert-Peterson is being asked to step down from hearing the claim filed by a Customs officer because of her familial relationship.
The judge is the wife of Senior Counsel Gilbert Peterson.
On Wednesday, attorneys for Terissa Dhoray filed a formal recusal application.
In it, they say, “There is a strong possibility of bias on the part of the court as this is her husband of many years and the reality of life is such that ‘pillow talk’ between a husband and his wife is bound to occur...
“The mere fact that the court is aware of the fact that her husband is a strong supporter of the government and ruling party from which he earns substantial income and enjoys the privilege of chairmanship of two major statutory bodies is likely to have a subconscious influence on the court.”
Peterson is the chairman of the Legal Aid Advisory Authority (LAAA) and the Telecommunications Authority (TATT).
Last week, Dhoray’s attorneys wrote to the judge alleging apparent bias and asking her to step down from the case.
On June 9, at a case-management hearing, Lambert-Peterson said having seen the letter, which was about her husband, there was no basis for her to recuse herself.
She gave case-management directions and said she would deal with any formal recusal application when one was filed.
The application filed on Wednesday includes affidavits from Dhoray and Public Services Association (PSA) president Leroy Baptiste. Dhoray is a member of the PSA.
“If a judge appears to be partial, public confidence in the judiciary is eroded. Therefore, a judge must avoid all activity that suggests that his or her decision may be influenced by external factors such as a personal relationship with a party or interest in the outcome of a case,” the application said.
It argued that a central feature of the TTRA constitutional challenge includes a complaint that the TTRA Act gave the Minister of Finance political control over the authority and allows undue political influence and interference with it.
“The claimant filed this case because she was concerned about the potential for political manipulation, influence and abuse of power in the TTRA...
“In terms of this matter, it is clear that the legal battle lines have been drawn in the political sands.”
The application raised concerns about the way the judge treated Dhoray’s application for an injunction, which she dismissed on June 5. Her decision has been appealed and will be heard on July 4. The injunction sought to halt the continued operationalisation of the TTRA.
The application raised the concerns outlined in the letter to the judge about her husband, his professional practice, and a “legitimate fear that the learned judge ‘will not bite the hand that is feeding her family,” in reference to Peterson’s chairmanship.
In his affidavit, Baptiste said the union’s members who are opposed to the establishment of the TTRA have raised their concerns over Peterson’s close relationship with the prime minister and the ruling PNM.
“Members expressed the view that it would be difficult for the learned judge to ignore the fact that her husband had received such immense financial benefits from the government when determining a case
that is of such high political sensitivity and allegedly concerns the government’s ability to earn revenue which it can then use to meet its expenses including, but not limited to, legal fees.”
Baptiste said a poll of 500 members was done and the majority said they were concerned about the judge’s familial relationship. A table provided claimed 423 people said they were concerned, and 77 purportedly said “no.” Of those polled, 416 purportedly also said they had concerns over the judge’s ability to continue hearing the matter and 84 said they were not. Of the 500 members polled, 412 said they believed another judge should be assigned, 84 disagreed, and four said it should be appealed.
“The resolution and judicial determination of the matters at issue in this claim will have far-reaching consequences for the public in TT and will have a direct impact upon all employees at the Inland Revenue Division (IRD) and Customs and Excise Division (CED).”
Dhoray’s lawsuit contests the implementation of section 18 of the TTRA Act, which deals with the enforcement division of the TTRA. It contends that it forces employees of the IRD and
CED to decide by August 1 if they want to join the authority.
By legal notice on April 14, President Christine Kangaloo proclaimed certain sections of the TTRA with effect from May 1. This, the lawsuit contends, took employees by surprise.
“Given the important coercive and enforcement power officers in the IRD and CED are clothed with by law, they are analogous to police officers.
“As such the possibility of political control and interference could have serious and drastic consequences for our society as it can be used to target political opponents, independent voices and organisations, journalists and civil society,” Baptiste said.
The post PSA complains of ‘pillow talk’ between judge, husband in TTRA recusal appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.