The Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago (LATT) is urging members of the public to refrain from personal attacks on members of the Court of Appeal and unfounded allegations that could undermine confidence in the administration of justice.
In a statement issued on Monday, the Association expressed concern about recent public commentary, including on social media, following the Court of Appeal’s recent ruling in the Hadeed case.
It said while robust public discussion of judicial decisions is entirely legitimate in a democratic society, criticism should remain respectful and not descend into unfounded allegations that impugn the integrity or independence of the Judiciary.
The LATT said the Court of Appeal’s decision was made in the context of an interlocutory application and did not necessarily determine the ultimate legality of the detention or the constitutionality of the emergency powers regime.
“Those substantive questions remain capable of judicial determination in the proceedings before the Court.”
The LATT also acknowledged the public’s right to criticise decisions of the courts, saying this was “healthy and desirable” in a democracy.
However, it warned that commentary which attacks the integrity of the Court, or which is made without regard to the legal and evidential basis for a decision, risks undermining public confidence in the administration of justice.
“In every dispute, there is a likelihood that one of the parties will be disappointed with the outcome. It is normal and expected that members of the public will express their views on, and disappointment with, decisions of the Court. In a democracy, this is a right of all, and indeed, criticism is healthy and desirable. The Court recognises that right: “Justice is not a cloistered virtue: she must be allowed to suffer the scrutiny and respectful, even though outspoken, comments of ordinary men.” It is the Supreme Court that safeguards the right of the public to criticise the decisions that it makes.”
The Law Association said it has every confidence in the independence and impartiality of the Judiciary and in the judicial process established by the Constitution.
“The Association notes that written reasons for the Court’s decision have not yet been delivered. Those reasons will explain the legal principles applied by the Court and will assist practitioners, litigants and members of the public in understanding the basis of the decision.”