Presidential Apology?
The response by the President of the Republic of Trinidad & Tobago is given below. This is the response to the fiasco caused by appointments of persons to the Integrity Commission.
"The occasion arose in February of this year for the appointment of an entirely new membership of commissioners to the Integrity Commission. In every respect that was an unprecedented occasion and one which presented challenges for our young nation. Notwithstanding the many challenges, on the first day of May 2009, I was well pleased to appoint five distinguished citizens to office. The process by which the members of this commission were and are to be chosen and appointed is one of the few in which, under the Constitution, the President of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago makes his own deliberate judgment.
This process carries within it the inherited residue of the former prerogative, which was vested in the Queen. Indeed, it has been said most recently by the Privy Council in the Trinity Cross judgment that the prerogative survives today, albeit in very restricted form and subject ultimately to the modern Republican Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago.
It is a legitimate question to ask, what is the meaning of this prerogative and, what is the degree of the residue? So far as the prerogative survives, the question is also to be asked, what are the checks and balances provided to its due exercise, within our constitutional and modern democratic structure? That democratic structure itself promotes a discerning public appropriately demanding accountability from its highest Office.
The Constitution of modern Trinidad and Tobago endows the President with this power of appointment in his own deliberate judgment, as an executive act, subject to susceptibility to human fallibility and supported by the checks and balances of a process of consultation with other important constitutional institutions within our parliamentary and democratic framework. It is, however, the foundation of the office and this prerogative, supported by all that is explicit and implicit in the Constitution, that the Office of President is and must remain above the cut and thrust of partisan politics.
The observation is made, without comment, that the recent practice of partisan politics seeks to embroil the Office of President in terms which the constitutional insulation does not permit. Thus it is today that the Office of President is the recipient of a regular flow of letters threatening law suits, called “pre-action protocol letters,” which, no sooner are they issued and sometimes even before they are received, are sent for publication in the media.
The unprecedented occasion giving rise to the need to appoint an entire commission, anew, has itself unfolded remarkably and within a mere week of the announcement of the appointments being made. The appointments themselves were met with widespread acclamation. Without exception, the appointed members have behaved as the exemplars that they are and for which reason they were chosen; they have behaved honourably and the Nation must applaud them. On behalf of the people of Trinidad and Tobago, I extend to them best wishes for continued commitment to the service of Trinidad and Tobago.
Father Henry Charles, Mr Jeffrey McFarlane, Mr Justice Zainool Hosein, Mrs Gladys Gafoor and Mrs Lylla Bada, as President of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, I acknowledge you as distinguished men and women who have placed nation before self. In every respect, the selections made were of honourable men and women but, whose selections have been undone by circumstances, some, one may say, of their own making, some not.
Should persons selected have been more forthcoming, more exacting in their self assessment and qualified fitness for purpose? Should the Office of President be endowed with investigatory facilities and resources to better sift the process of those who will guard the guards? Should those consulted themselves have had a more reliable process in place to receive the invitation for consultation and, themselves have been more forthcoming, to enable the consultation to be more meaningful? Did your President err? All of these are legitimate questions which arise to be weighed.
The process of inquiry can feed itself, well meaning and otherwise; the finger-pointing itself can become unending. A deliberative process is not free from the possibility of error and, to err is human. The responsibility is and remains mine and I accept this, unreservedly. The first responsibility to a concerned nation is that of accepting responsibility for such error as has led to this unfortunate imbroglio. As your President, I deeply regret the anxiety experienced by the people of Trinidad and Tobago and the embarrassment occasioned to the appointees. As a nation, Trinidad and Tobago must move on, as it always has and always shall.
The second responsibility is to assure the citizens and residents of this nation that Trinidad and Tobago does not have on its hands a constitutional crisis nor any vacuum in the Office of President, as is being made out. The Constitution and its processes endure and with vested confidence. The process of selection of eligible citizens who are willing to serve continues with the acting President and, in consultation with me. As a nation, Trinidad and Tobago continues to grow, the better indeed for a very healthy national discussion on ethics and integrity. That is as it should be."
Second Presidential Response
The president of the Republic of Trinidad & Tobago, Prof Max Richards, makes a second response on the Integrity Commission fiasco.
"Fellow Citizens,
It appears that the statement that I made on May, 15 2009, has been misunderstood. Let me emphasise, therefore, that any lack of clarity was unintentional. It is being said that I did not offer an apology to the nation. May I say that my expression of regret was intended to convey just that – an apology. I have noted that the word regret is used in polite formulas to express apology or sadness, but if it would give comfort to those who have a different interpretation of the word, I say now that I apologise. The reiteration, by me, of concerns as conveyed in questions, which did not originate with me but which were raised in the media, by the public, acknowledged the questions raised, but was not intended to absolve me from responsibility or to cast blame.
On the matter of confirmation of appointments, the Integrity in Public Life Act 2000 in Part II, Section 4 (4) is clear, that is to say, that the President appoints, after consulting both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. After consultation, the President may decide that his choices stand or he may choose to take a different course, based on the consultation, or for any other reason. Confirming an invitation to serve does not mean that someone else was party to the confirmation or directed it. I maintain that there never was and there is no constitutional crisis based on the vacancies on the Integrity Commission or because of my absence from Trinidad and Tobago. The absence from the country of the President does not in itself create a constitutional crisis, as provision is made, in Chapter 3, Section 27 (1) of the Constitution, for the duties of President to be carried out in his absence by the President of the Senate, as has happened in the past.
In the face of the resignation of Justice Hosein and subsequently those of Mr Mc Farlane and Father Charles, there have been calls for me to explain what could have led to those resignations and therefore, to reveal what might or might not have been said between myself and those nominees, prior to their appointment. By the demands being made for answers and explanations, I am being required, in effect, to enter into debate regarding statements made by persons who were invited to become members of the Integrity Commission, in order, perhaps, to establish, inter alia, the veracity of what has been said by them. Put another way, I am being encouraged, by these demands, to put up a defence, which is the very interpretation of my statement that has provoked ire.
May I say that, as President, I will not put in the public domain the conversations, of a confidential nature, that I held with anyone concerning the invitations to serve. That, in my view, is unseemly and not befitting the Office. I wish to make it abundantly clear that resignation from office holds no terror for me. The central consideration in any step that I take in this matter must be the welfare of the country. Resignation gives no guarantee of that and I will not allow the situation to be so manipulated as to result in yielding to pressure fuelled by lack of deep consideration of all the issues pertinent to resignation.
I have already apologised for error of judgment. To err is not to act disreputably. I have noted and listened carefully to the comments expressed by members of the public and have given the matter due consideration. I do not share the opinion held by some that I have brought the office of President of the Republic of T&T into disrepute and accordingly, see no reason to resign or to engage in further debate on the matter. I wish to thank the many individuals who have written or spoken in measured support of me. It is my hope that we, as a nation, will move on. The matters surrounding the Integrity Commission, which have occasioned negative fallout, have given us the opportunity to see that democracy is alive in T&T. This should give pause for serious thought and reinforce our determination to guard it and to improve on it. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Good night and may God bless T&T."