Message from His Excellency Professor George Maxwell Richards, President of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, on the matter involving the Honourable Chief Justice.

My fellow citizens, tonight I am faced with a very unfortunate dilemma. It is a dilemma which has not in our history confronted a Head of State and I venture to say it is a dilemma which has not confronted any Head of State in the history of any Commonwealth country. I speak of the present state of affairs involving the Honourable Chief Justice.

As your President, I have agonized over my responsibility to the State, to the administration of justice, and to the Constitution, which I am sworn to defend.I worry particularly at the examples now being set for our young and the disadvantaged. I am deeply troubled by the precedents now being set and uncertain whether the citizens of this country can now have faith in the system as it stands at the present time.

I recognize that the framers of the Constitution could not have envisaged and provided for every conceivable eventuality and issue which this country might face over the life of the Constitution.In particular, the prospect of a sitting Chief Justice being himself the subject of a criminal complaint, in all likelihood, would never have occurred to them.The other complications in the context of our uniquely multiracial society are not lost on me.

The population should understand that the system works without regard to race, religion or political persuasion. No citizen of the Republic is above the law.

On April 1, 2005, the Honourable Prime Minister made representation to the President under Section 137(3) of the Constitution that the question of removing the Chief Justice from Office should be investigated. The President was informed by the Prime Minister on April 12 of the names of the Chairman and Members of the proposed Tribunal.

The President must act according to the Constitution.

The President was advised that on April 13, the Honourable Mr. Justice Stollmeyer granted the Honourable Chief Justice leave to apply for judicial review and ordered that all actions or proceedings consequential upon the implementation of the decision of the Honourable Prime Minister to make representation to the President be stayed until after the hearing and determination of the motion or further order.

I recognized at that time that the Order had no binding effect on me as President since I was neither a party to the proceedings nor am I capable of being the subject of injunctive relief pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution.

I said at the time, however, that in deference to the Order of the Court, and out of an abundance of respect for it, and due process, I would choose to await the determination of those proceedings noting that Mr. Justice Stollmeyer had reportedly ordered that the matter be expeditiously determined in the public interest.

On an application made by the Honourable Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Stollmeyer recused himself. Over fifteen months later, that speedy determination of this critical issue which I had expected has not come to pass. To further complicate matters, new and very serious matters have arisen in respect of the Honourable Chief Justice which are themselves also the subject of a criminal complaint and Court proceedings.

I, of course, express no view as to innocence or guilt in these matters. That is not my function. Yet the fact that they exist cannot be ignored. As if this were not sufficient, events of Friday 14th July, 2006 have greatly troubled me. I have read a disturbing report of the Commissioner of Police in relation to that incident. Further, I have been visited by Justice Judith Jones as well as the Chief Justice. Without forming a view on these matters,I have concluded that the public interest requires a thorough investigation forthwith.

I am faced therefore with a set of circumstances - unprecedented in nature - in which, in my deliberate judgment, urgent action must be taken in defence of the rule of law and the administration of justice in the Republic. The image of our beloved country has suffered and continues to be the subject of ridicule in some quarters internationally. That action cannot amount to a usurpation of the principles of due process and the rule of law. //That action, in my view, must be as close as is possible, given the present constraints, to the express dictates of the Constitution, and above all, must reflect its spirit.

I am also of the firm view that more damage would accrue to our beloved Nation from "inaction" in the present circumstances than the "measured action" which I propose to take. The action which is required, however, must be no more than that which is absolutely necessary to restore the confidence of the citizenry in the rule of law and the administration of justice. Without this we are all lost as a nation. There must be one law for all, rich or poor, big or small.

I have before arriving at my decision met with every single judge of the Court of Appeal. I have also met with the Honourable Prime Minister and the Honourable Attorney General and I have also met on several occasions with the Honourable Chief Justice. All of the discussions during these meetings were full and frank.

I have heard all sides consistent with the principles of natural justice such as could be measured given the practical, deep and urgent crisis, which in my deliberate judgment we face as a nation.

Having heard from these eminent persons, and having taken all considerations into account, and ever mindful of my responsibilities to you the people and citizens of Trinidad and Tobago, I have in my considered judgment decided that certain courses of action are immediately required as a matter of necessity in defence of the rule of law and the proper administration of justice in Trinidad and Tobago.

On this I am taking the benefit of advice of Queen‘s Counsel both locally and abroad and will revert to you in the very near future.

I call on all citizens of the Republic to exercise restraint in this hour of crisis.

May God bless our nation.