CHIEF Justice Ivor Archie is not ruling out heading to the Privy Council to settle an impasse between the Judiciary and the Salaries Review Commission (SRC) over some of its judicial officers.
“Judicial officers have rights, too, just like every other citizen,” Archie said at the ceremonial opening of the 2024/2015 law term on September 20.
For a second time, the opening was held at the National Academy for the Performing Arts (NAPA), Port of Spain.
There was a low turnout of the legal fraternity, with many empty seats in the Lord Kitchener Auditorium. There was also a noticeably less than full complement of 60 judges present. Outspoken judges Carol Gobin and Frank Seepersad opted not to attend and instead presided over their cases in Port of Spain and Tobago respectively.
At the 2023-24 opening, Archie spoke of the need for administrative independence for the Judiciary and meaningful public-sector reform, as the existing system, with its structural and systemic deficiencies, was “crushing us all.”
A year later, he said not much had changed. He warned of the possibility of “shutting down” the court because of inadequate specialised staffing.
“Last year, I pointed out all the challenges we face and apparently ruffled some feathers, so it now appears that we have been selected for special treatment.” He disclosed the issue with the SRC, which Archie said was “now attempting to reduce the salaries of masters.” This, he said, was after the Judiciary recommended increases for 93 per cent of officers under its purview. Archie said masters’ salaries were fixed by the Parliament.
“They tell me they have senior counsel’s advice that what Parliament did was unconstitutional. More fundamentally, this was done without any prior discussion or attempt at justification.
“They also claim that judges’ salaries, which they recommended as being appropriate in 2011, should not be increased over a decade later, despite the effect of inflation and two salary increases for public servants in the interim.
“What if a public agency takes the position that it does not have to obey the law passed by Parliament because a lawyer thinks it may be unconstitutional? We in trouble.”
He said the Judiciary wrote to the SRC “pointing out the egregious blunders in their methodology and asked for a meeting.
“They said they would be in contact to arrange one, neglecting to mention the deadline imposed for their reconsideration of the 117th report has now passed. And I am still waiting.
“The last time I checked, all of us, including the SRC, must obey the law as long as it has not been invalidated by a court.
“Judicial officers have rights, too, just like every other citizen.”
He said “mature, respectful, good-faith discussion or litigation” are ways to recognise those rights.
“Obviously, we prefer the former, but we have to be prepared for either. It would be sad indeed, you know, if we have to go to the Privy Council. That would be a shame.”
[caption id="attachment_1109974" align="alignnone" width="1024"] Officers from
