The Tribune

AT a time when The Bahamas needs a strong Opposition, it seems that the FNM is at its weakest.

The leadership question has to be settled earlier than the end of this year – a fact that became obvious when FNM leader Dr Hubert Minnis recently led a group of protestors to the Nassau and South Street Magistrate’s Court complex where ten of their number were being charged with blocking private property at Cabbage Beach. The charges against them were damage, disorderly behaviour and three counts of obstruction.

Only one pleaded not guilty while the others refused to plead whereupon the chief magistrate entered a “not guilty” plea, granted $1,800 bail to each of them and ordered them back to court on April 20 for a status hearing.

In an attempt to show that his party was in sympathy with the “little man”, Dr Minnis displayed complete ignorance of the separation of powers under the Westminster system of government – the Bahamas’ system of government.

His march to the courts suggests that his party is still not working as a cohesive unit, because if he had consulted his colleagues he would have been advised by the lawyers amongst them of the consequences of assembling outside a court of law to try to influence the proceedings inside. If he had discussed it with those with experience, he would have been given a lesson in the system of the separation of powers — parliament, the executive and the judiciary. He would have learned that one cannot trespass on the territory of the other without serious consequences — a head-on collision towards which Immigration Minister Fred Mitchell now seems to be headed in questioning how a judge arrived at her conclusion that two Cubans had been illegally held in prison for the past three years.

As if his show of political ignorance were not bad enough, Dr Minnis went even further by promising that if the FNM were to win the 2017 election the party would expunge the records of the accused men if necessary. This would not only be setting a precedent, but it would be interesting to know how Dr Minnis would propose to do such a thing.

He will eventually learn. However, the political situation in this country is so serious that the nation cannot wait for his learning experience to kick in quickly enough to make him a leader of a party that should be ready to replace the Christie government.

In 1964, Lynden Pindling had to learn the hard way the consequences of trying to bully a court. It happened in Freeport on September 17, 1964 – two years before he became prime minister.

On that day, Stipendiary and Circuit Magistrate John Baily, a no nonsense Irishman, was hearing a case in Freeport when he ordered the arrest of Mr Pindling and 30 of his followers for contempt of court.

At the time, Mr Pindling was, not only the leader of the PLP, but the lawyer for the Taxi Cab Union. That day, he took 30 members of the Freeport union with him as a show of force outside the court. Inside Magistrate Baily was hearing an appeal by a cab driver who had been found guilty of trespassing on property belonging to the Grand Bahama Port Authority.

It was reported that although the picketing was orderly and there was no blocking of trafficking, the magistrate was going to tolerate no show of force on his territory. He ordered them arrested and held at the police station for the rest of the day. It was understood that when all the cases for the day had been completed, Mr Pindling and his group would be charged with contempt of court.

However, at day’s end, Magistrate Baily probably felt that they had cooled their heels long enough in the hot station that they should have by then purged their contempt.

He decided to rescind his order and release them — with a wry smile that, knowing Baily, would have said “get out of my court and sin no more”.

As far as we recall, that was the last time that members of the PLP government tried to picket a court. However, their behind-closed-doors interference in cases where their constituents, or, even in a few cases, family members were involved, continued, much to the chagrin of former Chief Magistrate Wilton Hercules. Mr Hercules eventually left The Bahamas, but seemed not to forget his disgust at the political interference in many of his decisions.

According to the stories that he would tell the late Sir Etienne Dupuch in their daily morning walks years ago on Cayman Island’s Five Mile beach, interference with the judiciary during the Pindling government was the order of the day.

Magistrate Hercules was noted as a strict, no nonsense magistrate. If you did the crime, you did the time, was his rule. He did not care who you were. During the Pindling era, this rule did not settle well with PLP politicians if one of their constituents stood in the dock before him. In retirement, Magistrate Hercules told of his bitter resentment.

However, today the political situation is so dire that if the FNM is serious about governing, they will have to take the leadership of their party seriously and start building a structure that by 2017 can offer itself as capable of sound government.