THREE cheers for whoever was responsible for oiling the wheels of justice so well that it delivered freedom for a Frenchman, Eric Sommer, who had been on remand at Bordelais for four years. But it does raise a whole lot of questions, doesn’t it.
We talk here about the independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers, and some take offence at the slightest suggestion that courts and judges can be influenced from outside in dispensing justice, but the questions will be asked, especially about the fairness of the system and the double standards it sometimes perpetuates.
Sommer had a murder charge laid against him for the alleged murder of a Saint Lucian reduced to manslaughter. He pleaded guilty to the lesser charge and received a four year sentence which translated into the time he had already served. In the blink of an eye, he was out of there. Swift justice. But the three hundred or so St Lucians still on remand at Bordelais will be asking: “What about us”? And with good reason, because all are supposed to be equal under the law.
Let’s state upfront that St Lucia violated the human rights of this Frenchman by keeping him locked away without trial for so long, the same way it continues today to deny rights to its own citizens who are at Bordelais in similar circumstances. Some of them have been on remand for twice as long as Sommer and still cannot get a hearing, far less their freedom. In fact, they have now been disadvantaged on two counts: first, by being held for so long without trial and secondly, by being discriminated against as a result of Sommer being set free.
No one needs to be told that the pressure placed on the government by the European Union, and France in particular, over the state of justice in the country, was the influencing factor in Sommer getting his freedom. Diplomacy was employed and achieved almost instant results. And what about the timing, coming close to the deadline agreed to between Prime Minister Anthony and a European delegation in January for there to be movement on EU concerns about the state of the IMPACS matter and the long delay in bringing prisoners to trial?
What the Sommer decision proves, however, is that there can be movement in the appalling state of the penal system and the administration justice in St Lucia if the powers that be would only continue to demonstrate the same kind of resolve that sprung this Frenchman from Bordelais this week. We wait with bated breath to see whether this was a stand-alone case of favouritism or the beginning of a determined attempt to process remand prisoners and give them their day in court, thereby ensuring justice for all.
St Lucians are tired of the empty promises that are made from time to time about attending to the deficiencies in the system that have brought our country under the international microscope as a violator of human rights. In another country, the Minister of Home Affairs would have long been made to resign over the deterioration of so many services over which he was given responsibility that have combined to give our country a bad name. But this is St Lucia where no one accounts and no one is held accountable.
Yesterday the French Embassy issued a terse statement on the Eric Sommer matter. It read: “After four years, the Sommer case is closed.
“The trial which was anticipated by the French authorities, at the highest level, was finally held and led to the release of Eric Sommer.
“Mr. Sommer left Saint Lucia that night”.
As we say, it was swift justice….but not justice for all.
100 % Saint Lucian?
==================
What in heaven’s name is that? What does that mean? I wanted to ask when I saw our Prime Minister proudly wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with the phrase but thought against it. But what really prompted me to put fingers to key is a meme of Chastanet wearing a similar T-shirt with a 99% reduction of “Saint Lucianness”.
I think it is reasonable to suggest that before anyone can claim any degree of “Saint Lucianness “they should be able to first explain to us what does it mean to be a Saint Lucian, no?
No one, leader or follower, priest or prophet, fireman or farmer, has ever attempted to address this question – What is our National Identity? And specifically who is a Saint Lucian?
What are the characteristics of an authentic Saint Lucian? What are the features of, the values, and the ideals that fashion our national character?
How can we spot a Saint Lucian from a Dominican on Church Ave in Brooklyn? Who or what determines where everyone is positioned on the “Saint Lucianness” continuum? Is there something one can do to earn more Saint Lucianness points?
What does one have to avoid doing so as to not jeopardize his/her standing on the continuum?
Is it the amount of melanin one’s skin? Is it their ability to speak lange mama nous? Is it their level of economic well-being or lack thereof?
I deliberately asked these last two specific questions to highlight the fact that this idea of Saint Lucianness became a focal point in our national political discourse since Allen Chastanet got within a hair’s breadth of being the Prime Minister of Saint Lucia.
What makes Kenny Anthony more Saint Lucian than Allen Chastanet?
Is someone from the ghetto more Saint Lucian than someone from, say, Cap Estate?
Does someone who hails from Delcer more Saint Lucian than someone from Marchand? If so, then why?
If you’ve never eaten fig and backs how many Saint Lucianness points do you lose? How long must you stay out of the country to lose your Saint Lucianness?
Your party affiliation does not determine your degree of Saint Lucianness, I would hope?
I really believe that we have to honestly search for answers to these questions that will make it clear to all of us when our Saint Lucianness is in jeopardy or when we are not showing outward signs of our Saint Lucianness.
We must not promote false, spurious, misleading claims that serve to divide us rather than unify us.
We must refrain from using certain phrases, no matter how catchy or how cute we think they are, that only serves to drive a wedge between us or to make some of us question our patriotism like one smelling their arm pit to ensure they don’t smell funky.
Those of us in leadership must not, whether wittingly or unwittingly, promote such divisive narrative thinking it will give them a leg up politically.
We all need to be vigilant when certain things that can be detrimental to our national cohesion begin to creep into our body politic.
A word to the wise and the otherwise.
There are more of these cases to play out soon. This is the legacy of the lady DPP. Now that that she is out,those injustices will be be solved. We as nation need to answer the question of the independence of the office of the DPP. Can that office be accountable to no one?