Why AG said CoI lawyers should be called to Bar then denied injunction?- 'Edju En Ka'
The question of why and what motivated the decision of the AG was brought up on the Monday, November 15, 2021, edition of the Umoja Show on ZBVI 780AM, by host Cromwell Smith aka ‘Edju En Ka’ while he was interviewing guest, Hon Willock on the CoI Court case issue and ruling of Judge [Ag] Mr Adrian Jack.
According to Hon Willock, he had filed an injunction as a party in the CoI to stop the three lawyers; Bilal M. Rawat acting as Counsel and Andrew King, along with Rhea Harrikissoon, acting as Solicitors, from practicing law in alleged violation of the VI laws since March 2021.
AG being intimidated by 3rd party?
Before the injunction, Hon Willock and Deputy Speaker Hon Neville A. Smith (AL) had filed an objection to the lawyers' application to be called to the Bar and the first matter was still before the courts.
Hon Willock indicated it was after the injunction was filed, that his legal team was made aware that they needed the permission of the Attorney General, who after correspondence, had never indicated that they needed her permission before.
However, she had already put on the record that the three lawyers broke the law, the Speaker said, which further motivated the decision to file an injunction.
“We Spoke to the Attorney General, she could not give us permission, because she already stated in writing that she is not objecting, so all we did was withdraw the case,” Hon Willock said.
Something is wrong with AG's decision - Smith
Mr Smith then questioned what could have motivated the AG to not move ahead with a case against three persons accused of breaking the laws of the VI.
“Why would she say they should be called to the bar and then deny the permission?" Mr Smith asked.
“If she says they had to be called to the bar but ain’t give you permission for the injunction, certainly something is wrong with her decision,” Smith posited.
Attorney for Speaker of the House of Assembly Hon Julian Willock, Mr Richard G. Rowe said he intends to use the Attorney General’s own words against her in an upcoming court appearance in the matter involving the alleged illegal practice by three attorneys from the United Kingdom (UK) on the Commission of Inquiry (CoI).
Justice Adrian Jack had said that the only thing missing to enable the injunction to be heard was the consent of the AG, as Hon Willock had no legal standing to carry forward the injunction on his own.
Hon Willock said he made it clear to the AG that his actions to file the injunction in court were motivated by the principles that the rule of law must be equal for all in the territory and that it was done on behalf of the people of the VI.
26 Responses to “Why AG said CoI lawyers should be called to Bar then denied injunction?- 'Edju En Ka'”
COI OVER WITH AND FOCUS .ON GETTING THE COUNTRY UP AND RUNNING / SO WHY THE KING HAD TO BLOCK THE COI FROM GOING FORWARD ? ( BOTH OF U GOT A PROBLEM ?
Mr. Mac did not design nor bring the financial services here, he simply was in the role as the business grew.
He, like yourself, should be thanking the industry for remaining here despite the hurdles and problems put in front of them by operating here.
Learn how things work before you speak foolishness.
Someone must pay for violating our fundemental law, not me. Maybe a self claimed smathman will have to pay.
If Willock's actions was motivated by the principles that the rule of law must be equal for all in the territory and that it was done on behalf of the people of the VI, then the court has ruled. He need to pay the dam money and shut the hell up.
Using your own logics, emergency vehicles can run a red light without any infringement against the law.
The days of obeying the MASSA are over and it is time for us to unite in order to defeat the White Supremist. Our enemies in the Territory are the descendants of the slave master who are returning to retake their colonies from the
descendant of slave. Time will tell.