Paul Lismore


Rédigé par Paul Lismore le Mardi 5 Mai 2020

What is wrong with our so called "free and independent press"? Why can't they present us with the pertinent facts on any matter, instead of them trying to impose their prejudices and insane bias on us, couched with 'facts' that simply do not pass the test of reality?

I praised Axcel Chenney yesterday because his articles on the incompetence of SBM was factual and based on proper research. Why is it so difficult for his colleagues to do the same thing, instead of either copy/pasting or pretending to be third rate comedians with inane jeu de mots that makes our arses sweat with anger and disgust?

Someone sent me a copy of today's article in L'Express about the retirement of Eddy Balancy as Chief Judge. Let us be clear about one simple fact first and then I will deal with the garbage that L'Express has poured on us in the article: Eddy Balancy has reached his retirement age of 67 for judges and therefore there is absolutely nothing wrong in him going and being replaced with the next in line, Ashraf Caunhye.

This is what happens all the time, and L'Express should have noticed that Eddy Balancy became Chief Judge precisely when Matadeen had to retire because he too had reached 67.

So, it was ok for Matadeen to follow the usual protocol and retire at 67, but not for Eddy Balancy because of the farcical premise that he still had some judgements to write? Eoula! Whose fault is that?

If you know you have to retire on the 5th of May 2020, then you use your time judiciously, for want of a better word, and do everything to clear your desk so that your successor can start with a clean slate, non? What you do not do is use the excuse that because of whatever reasons that only you know, you have not completed your judgements and therefore ban la zot faute si zot pa donne moi ene extension pou conplete sa? Eoula! That is not worthy of what most of us would like to refer to as judicial wisdom....

I praised Eddy Balancy on many occasions, the last one being the way he slapped down those upstarts at the Bar Council for not understanding its basic and primary function of defending its members; and for the way he put the man from the SLO in his place when he tried to play for time in the Sowkee v Nobin case. That was excellent, imho, and I could not care less if some super arrogant zavokas felt that I had gone overboard with my comments on them. As they say in Riviere Noire, fuck them!

But for L'Express to print his letter without any clarification whatsoever gives the impression that a grave injustice has been caused to the man, " It would be regrettable if any of these SIX cases had to be started anew as this would, as you will surely appreciate, cause a lot of prejudices to the parties concerned.."

Whose fault is that? Hasn't that delay which you are entirely responsible for already caused " a lot of prejudices to the parties concerned"?

How come everyone seems to have forgotten the more than justifiable remonstrance of the Privy Council a few years ago when it decried the legendary laziness of some of our judges in taking years to write what often turns out to be a 2-3 page judgement? If all the legal procedures have been completed in court with the prosecution and defence final speech after all the evidence has been presented, what stops our judges from completing the process with a judgement asap? Good Lord! UK judges and magistrates often take less than an hour to arbitrate on any points of law or applications, and not the months it sometimes takes our people to do! Do they not care about the 'prejudices' to the defendants and the victims when they laze about?

To make matters worse, because of the absence of any meaningful research in this clear display of kozer pou la guele napa senti pi. those geniuses at L'Express then went on to talk about "la nominations des Senior Counsels et Senior Attorneys a l'origine du refus de la presidence"? Bousser fesse do! You would not have written that piece of garbage if you knew the list that the ex Chief Judge has prepared.

The stench from it is quite unbearable because of the number of tongues indulging in their favourite exercise of arse licking, and the sheer uselessness of most of the names being bandied about.

As usual, I have camouflaged their names because our zavokas are extremely sensitive, aren't they? The only thing these people share is mediocrity and the ability to please their seniors.

1/  JP : sanctioned for gross misconduct by the Supreme Court 2/ JCB : hopeless ghetto lawyer who happens to be a favourite of the press 3/ RS : money laundering charge 4/  AC : nominated because of a combination of creole/ white lobby 5/ AD : hopeless ti caporal and failed politician 6/ SH: often taking the Court for a ride by dragging his feet and organiser of louche parties for the learned people 7/ SO : below average counsel who very rarely appears before the Supreme Court 8/ YN : best known for his photography at the weddings/parties at Their Honour, his delusion that every woman on earth will only ever feel complete if they have enjoyed his accoutrement, and for having slept with the wife of an ex AG and impregnating her...

I will refrain from writing about laziness, an inordinate fondness for alcohol that must surely cloud one's judgement, the feud with a fellow judge following some extra curricular activities in one of the judge's chambers...nor will I write about drunken driving and causing an accident which needed Caunhye to come and extricate him, the coaching of a useless zavoka the week end preceding an appeal involving both, one as judge and the other as lawyer for the appellant...and I refuse to write about consorting with prostitutes during working hours, or being repeatedly late for work with all sorts of stupid excuses...or delaying judgements due to laziness or refusing to hear cases assigned to him.

No, I won't write about these things....or of a private numbered car in front of a bordel opposite a college where some schoolgirls used to go on the game. Yes, I refuse to write about those sordid matters.

As far as I am concerned, Eddy Balancy scored many positive points when he dealt with Sowkhee/Nobin case...and with the Rezistans et Alternativ case against the government re ethnic declaration for elections.

But to now present a list of SCs and SAs which is based on mixture of nepotism, ethnicity, and political patronage leaves him with a big stain on his reputation, far worse than when he complained that a bus driver had not stopped in an illegal area, simply because Missier la ti dimane li. Because judges must not only be seen to defend the concept of equal rights for all, but to actually practise it.

Appointing Senior counsels or Senior Attorneys on the basis of colour, creed, race, or religion is totally undignified and brings the system of justice into disrepute. It is no good saying that others had done it in the past. Two wrongs can never make a right, and it is your decision as an individual that counts, not repeating the rotten concept of our politicians "ban la oussi ti fer parey".

When you are a judge, you are supposed to rise above the fray and act impartially. That prospective list of SCs and SAs is obscene because it rewards mediocrity and arse licking. 
And that can never be right.

Mardi 5 Mai 2020

Nouveau commentaire :

Règles communautaires

Nous rappelons qu’aucun commentaire profane, raciste, sexiste, homophobe, obscène, relatif à l’intolérance religieuse, à la haine ou comportant des propos incendiaires ne sera toléré. Le droit à la liberté d’expression est important, mais il doit être exercé dans les limites légales de la discussion. Tout commentaire qui ne respecte pas ces critères sera supprimé sans préavis.