Archive for June, 2013
Jamaican ganja activists plan road to law reform
(
CNS): An organisation seeking to decriminalize the use of ganja in Jamaica is planning an international conference for September to urge more people to support the cause and push for the repeal the laws against its use. "We need to stand up for our rights," attorney-at-law, Lord Anthony Gifford, told a press conference in Kingston last week when the event, organised by the Ganja Law Reform Coalition, was announced. Gifford, a UK hereditary peer who practices law in Jamaica and London, believes most Jamaicans will support decriminalization and the conference was aimed at starting a process of changing the law and encouraging government toact.
"We need to mobilize opinion, and I think Jamaican opinion is very favourable on the whole issue of the legalization of ganja, but we need to get up stand up, stand up for our rights," Gifford said whose interest in the plant began because of its medicinal qualities and his own bout with cancer.
"The Government has shown some sympathy to some decriminalization measures and expunging from criminal records but, as in all things, things don't happen until the people move and this conference will be a valuable tool for agitation," Gifford added.
According to the organisers, the Kingston-based conference will explore the scientific benefits and commercial opportunities of marijuana, and Paul Chang, the chairman of the coalition, said the laws of Jamaica do not match the practises of its people, in particular the religious practices of the Rastafarian movement.
Although the GLRC does not promote the use of ganja, especially by minors, it believes the plant is a sacrament to many people and, like tobacco and alcohol, should be taxed andregulated.
Gifford, who is a director of the Ganja Law Reform Coalition, said the issue was a human rights one and there should not be a penalty for usage of marijuana in a moderate, responsible manner, as he urged Jamaicans to speak out. “It makes no sense for people to be penalised … it’s their choice,” he said.
Assistant secretary of the Rastafari Millennium Council, Tzdhne Ishigyhd, questioned why the coca plant, from which cocaine is derived, and the poppy, which is used to make opium, are not illegal plants, but ganja is the only herb on the planet that is illegal.
While the world may have developed a perception of Jamaican society as ganja-tolerant, laws against its use have persisted because of the influence of the United States, which had for many years opposed its legalization. The history of ganja’s criminalisation is deeply tied up with the politics of difference and race and the American war on drugs.
However, as the evidence mounts about the various medical and beneficial properties as well as the practical purposes for the use of the plant, ganja has been decriminalized in a number of American states. Its use for medical reasons is now legal in 18 states, as well as Washington DC, with another six are making plans for decriminalization. This legalisation is now fuelling business interest and another recent conference in New York saw Wall Street taking a particular interest in the plant and asking if cannabis will be the next big industry.
Cops to investigate Dr Frank’s arrest
(CNS): Following the rejection of the crown’s case against former Cabinet member and playwright Dr Frank McField by a magistrate recently, Police Commissioner David Baines has confirmed that an internal investigation has been launched into the circumstances surrounding his arrest and subsequent charges. Baines told McField in a short letter last week that his case raised “issues of serious concern”. Meanwhile, Sandra Catron, another outspoken local activist who won a judicial review against the police over an unlawful warrant, has written to the justice of the peace who signed it without having a clue what it was about to refrain from signing any more.
The two cases both raised serious questions about the conduct of the local police and are not dissimilar from many cases that have gone through the local courts where the behaviour of the local police has been called into question or demonstrated to be questionable at best and unlawful on some occasions. However, while many allegations have been made by people about the police, they have not always been so tenacious or in a position to defend themselves against possible unlawful acts by those serving in uniform or to directly take on the authorities so publicly.
However, following the dismissal of the case against Frank McField, when Magistrate Kirstyann Gunn accepted his 'no case to answer' submission part way through his summary court trial, he wrote to David Baines. McField asked for a public apology and some form of compensation as a result of what he said was a wrongful arrest and the way that both he and his partner were treated by RCIPS officers during an incident last year at McField’s George Town restaurant, when officers appear to have acted outside of the law.
Although falling far short of an apology or any compensation, the acknowledgement of the issues of concern and the questions raised is a step on that road. However, McField still has a long battled ahead as the police continue to investigate themselves. Internal police enquiries carried out by the Professional Standards Unit very rarely find against the RCIPS but McField is not likely to let the incident be swept under the carpet. Chief Inspector Richard Barrow, the senior officer tasked with dealing with the case, will be doing so under much greaterpublic scrutiny than is usually the case for internal enquiries.
Meanwhile, Catron has written to Louis Ebanks, the Justice of the Peace who signed a police warrant which police used to conduct an invasive search of her office, home and car in relation to a case of alleged harassment via an ICT network, asking him to stop signing any more warrants.
In a shocking revelation in the court during a judicial review of the warrant in Catron’s case, the JP admitted that he had signed it having absolutely no idea of what it was for, without seeing any evidence of a crime and simply because the police asked him to, as he had in every case for the last two decades. Despite this, the judge had made it clear that the JP should not suffer the consequences but that it should be the RCIPS and crown that should remain responsible for the consequences and any possible compensation paid to Catron.
When Catron realized this week that Ebanks was still signing warrants, she wrote to him asking that he refrain from doing so. She has copied her letter to the premier, who under his new portfolio has responsibility for issues relating to law and order, as well as the deputy governor asking them to address the situation and amend the Summary Jurisdiction Law (2006 Revision) to prevent the police from using this JP and others who are not familiar with the law. Catron said she will be beginning a campaign to get the law changed and prevent the use of JPs without legal experience from signing warrants and force police to use officers of the court.
See Baines' letter to McField and Catron’s letter to the JP posted below.
Related articles on CNS:
Legal-blunders-could-cost-public-purse-dear
Court moves on Rivers case
(CNS): The court has moved quickly on the necessary proceedings over the challenge filed against the election of C4C member of the Legislative Assembly, Tara Rivers. According to the cause lists for this week, the Rivers case is listed for a directions hearing on Tuesday afternoon in Grand Court Five. The election petition filed last Wednesday, as revealed by CNS, queries the new education minister’s qualifications to be an elected member on two grounds. John Gordon Hewitt, the husband of Velma Hewitt, the UDP candidate who finished fifth in the West Bay poll, has petitioned the courts stating that Rivers has a US passport and was not resident in Cayman for the seven years prior to the election as required.
So far, Rivers has not commented on her qualification but released a short statement Friday saying she would be defending her election to office and fighting the challenge. The PPM leader and new premier, Alden McLaughlin, who invited Rivers into his Cabinet in the immediate wake of the election, even though she ran on the Coalition for Cayman ticket, also offered his support to his Cabinet colleague.
It is hoped that the issue will be resolved quickly as it is very likely that, should Rivers lose the challenge, a by-election will need to be held in the district because of the significant number of votes achieved by Rivers in the General Election. It is unlikely that Velma Hewitt, who came in fifth, would have been the major recipient of Rivers’ votes if she had not run as the C4C candidate, as they were seen as an anti-UDP vote by many. Had she not participated, a significant portion of her votes may well have gone to one of the other 11 candidates in the West Bay race.
With a very recent precedent set in the Turks and Caicos by former Cayman magistrate Margaret Ramsey Hale, now a judge in that territory, Hewitt’s challenge, if successful, is unlikely to result in the requested automatic return to office of his wife.
The challenge was filed just ahead of the deadline on the three week window of opportunity provided for by the elections law but it was not unexpected. The issue of Rivers being out of the country for a large part of the seven years prior to the election had been queried prior to the national poll but Rivers had made no comment on the issue.
In addition, on Nomination Day Rivers was one of a half dozen or so candidates who refused to sign a voluntary declaration document created by the Elections Office to focus candidates' minds on the various qualification requirements in an effort to reduce the risk of a challenge to any of them.
It is nosecret that Rivers was working in London between 2006 and 2009 as an associate at a law firm. However, she has reportedly claimed that she was also a student at the time and said it was not an issue. The elections law does provide some exemptions to the seven year residency requirement for candidates ahead of qualification, including being off island in order to study. However, it is not clear if that relates to those studying abroad while also holding a full time job overseas.
CNS contacted C4C committee members, who had claimed to scrutinize all of the candidates they had endorsed, to ask if they had satisfied themselves that Rivers did not hold dual nationality and that her absence from the islands was legitimately covered by the law. But the advocacy group, which has positioned itself on a platform of accountability and transparency in government, has not responded.
CAACI dodges issue of heliport safety
(CNS): A statement released by the Civil Aviation Authority of the Cayman Islands (CAACI) on Friday relating to a ruling from Chief Justice Anthony Smellie which questioned the authority's certification of a heliport in George Town because of safety reasons gave very little away. In a ruling issued last month following a legal dispute the chief justice said the aviation authority had not followed its own rules and regulations when it licensed the new downtown helipad belonging to Cayman Islands Helicopters Ltd and ordered them to reassess the certification. However, the authority has made no comment on the findings other than to say people have a right to take legal action and has not said what it plans to do to address the CJ’s order.
In a meaningless statement released on Friday afternoon following the revelations in the local media about the issue, the CAACI said it took safety seriously. However, it did not say what it intended to do about the heliport and the reassessment of the license and the safety question.
The CAACI merely stated that it was a defendant in the legal action, which was filed by Axis International Ltd, the owner of a commercial site near to harbor front heliport. It said it was “disappointed” by the chief justice’s findings when he ruled that the CAACI "did not properly satisfy itself that all the regulatory requirements for certification were complied with and ordered that the Authority reassess the Heliport to decide whether or not the certification should stand.”
However, there was no indication about the action that the authority plans to take or any details of the appeal which the authority is reportedly pursing with tax payers’ cash.
“While disappointed with the ruling, the CAACI accepts that in a democratic society governed by the rule of law, decisions of government and public authorities may be challenged through the Courts,” it said. “The CAACI reaffirms its commitment to the safety of aviation operations in the Islands and seeks to reassure the public that, as always, it will continue to apply appropriate regulatory standards, along with sound technical and professional judgment in all its regulatory activities, through its highly qualified and competent staff."
But the claim rang a little hollow, given the findings of the chief justice, who pointed to a number of influences over the CAACI’s certification of the heliport, not least commercial ones, which appeared to override safety considerations. The country’s senior judge made it quite clear that the CAACI shifted the goalposts on safety in order to find a way to certify the heliport site, despite the numerous problems listed in his 149 page complex ruling.
See full CAACI statement below.
Related article on CNS:
UK gives credit to Cayman for cooperation
(CNS Business): The Cayman premier was keen to stress that the jurisdiction had not been forced to sign any new agreements during the UK Trip this week and that the UK prime minister have acknowledged the cooperation of Cayman over the years when it comes to issues of tax transparency. He said that Cayman had also agreed to publish its action plan regarding beneficial ownership at the same time as other jurisdictions in the wake of this week’s G8 meeting. “The UK was informed nearly two months ago – on 25 April – that Cayman would produce the action plan,” Alden McLaughlin said Saturday in the wake of the pre-G8 meeting with David Cameron on Saturday. Read more and comment on CNS Business
Man hurt in nightclub fight
(CNS): A 28-year-old George Town man was injured when he was hit with a bottle during a fight at a West Bay Road nightclub in the early hours of Monday morning. Police said that at 3:32am officers of the Uniform Support Group of the RCIPS were in the parking lot at the Strand in the vicinity of the Elements nightclub when the man left the club with blood running down his face. As officers tried to help the man and find out what had happened, another fight broke out amongst the crowd of people who had also come out of the club. The officers eventually brought the crowd under control and managed to establish that the man had been wounded when he was hit in the face with a bottle inside the club.
He was taken to the Cayman Islands Hospital by a private vehicle before the ambulance arrived and his injury was not life threatening.
Police officers are now investigating the circumstances of the assault and are asking anyone with information that can assist with this enquiry to call George Town Police Station on 949-4222 or 9497777 or Crime Stoppers at 800(TIPS) 8477
UK local government’s lavish spending revealed
(Daily Mail): Britain's council bosses are lavishing millions in taxpayers' cash on chauffeur-driven cars and jet-setting trips, an investigation has found. The astonishing spending includes five-star jaunts across the globe, the use of luxury chauffeured Bentleys, Jaguars and BMWs, and even private golf lessons for council staff. One local authority used their taxpayer-funded charge cards to buy pedicures. The spending was uncovered by Channel 4's Dispatches 'How Councils Waste Your Money' and comes despite cash-strapped local authorities imposing deep cuts to social care and services.
The investigation found:
More than £30million spent ferrying around town hall top brass in chauffeured cars in five years.
Almost £4million spent on trips abroad to countries including Brazil, Australia and Jamaica.
One council spent £23,000 employing a twinning ambassador to a picturesque French town.
Councillors using payment cards on luxury hotels and lavish meals at celebrity restaurants.
Communities and Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles slammed the high spending at a time of deepening austerity. He said: 'I can pretty much tell you now that money spent on golf lessons by local authorities, or pedicures, is not wisely spent.'
WestStar stealing channels
(CNS): HBO Latin America says WestStar TV is illegally broadcasting its content and has lodged a complaint with Cayman’s regulatory authority. According to lawyers for the cable network company, the local TV station is broadcasting HBO and Cinemax programmes without paying any licencing fees to the company, contrary to US Federal law. While WestStar has been broadcasting HBO channels for some time, the move to get tough on the television company comes a few months after telecommunications firms LIME and Logic both launched their TV services in the Cayman Islands, having signed legal agreements with HBO Latin America, enabling both companies to broadcast all of its channels legitimately.
“WestStar TV Limited is not authorized or licensed by the copyright owners to distribute or rebroadcast HBO and Cinemax programming in the Cayman Islands,” law firm Hampson and Company stated in a release aimed at both the company and subscribers to the TV station.
The channels which the firm says WestStar is illegally broadcasting include HBO rebroadcast as WestStar’s Channel 17; CineMax rebroadcast as WestStar’s Channel 35; HBO Plus rebroadcast as WestStar’s Channel 151; HBO Signature rebroadcast as WestStar’s Channel 152, MoreMax rebroadcast as WestStar’s Channel 154; ActionMax rebroadcast as WestStar’s Channel 155; HBO Family rebroadcast as WestStar’s Channel 157; and HBO Latino rebroadcast as WestStar’s Channel 178.
“WestStar TV has engaged in an unethical practice of unauthorized interception of US satellite TV transmissions contrary to US Federal law, in breach of the terms of the satellite TV provider (Dish Network), by rebroadcasting and distributing this HBO and Cinemax programming to subscribers in the Cayman Islands for commercial purposes, without the consent of the owners of the copyright in that HBO and Cinemax programming and without payment of any form of licensing fees to HBO Latin America,” the law firm stated.
“HBO Latin America has given WestStar TV notice of the position and every opportunity to cease its interception and rebroadcast of HBO and Cinemax programming, and while WestStar has not denied these unethical activities it has continued to engage in these practices, compelling HBO Latin America to make the position public and refer the matter to the Cayman Islands regulator.”
HBO Latin America, the exclusive distributor and licensee of HBO and Cinemax programming in the Caribbean, said through their lawyers that they had pressed the local regulators, the Information and Communications Technology Authority (ICTA), to take appropriate action against WestStar “with a view to ensuring a level playing field among television providers in the Cayman Islands and avoiding an unfair competitive advantage to WestStar TV, in the interest of all subscribers in the Cayman Islands.”
They said, “HBO Latin America is confident that the local regulatory authority will take appropriate action to address this entirely unsatisfactory situation. HBO Latin America is proud of its licensed and authorized Cayman Islands’ partners, LIME and Logic, who offer world class HBO and Cinemax programming to their subscribers with the authority and license of the copyright owners.”
See Viewpoint: Why is piracy legal in Cayman? (29 January 2010)
Related articles:
Telecoms firm launches fibre optic TV service (CNS Business, 17 January 2013)
Internet TV arrives in CI (CNS Business, 10 April 2013)
CIG plans action on beneficial ownership
(CNS Business): The Cayman government delegation that met with the UK prime minister in London, Saturday has agreed to publish a national action plan on Beneficial Ownership and to play an active part in the new pilot initiative of multilateral automatic tax information exchange launched by the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain. The CIG does not appear to have signed any new agreements relating to the onshore world’s planned tax transparency clamp down but it has also agreed to commit to joining the Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance on Tax Matters, as previously stated. Read more and comment on CNS Business
In support of Sweet Pea
The private sector pays enormous sums of money to cover their healthcare. I pay 50% of my healthcare, my portion of which amounts to approximately $260 (this is my rate as a fairly healthy non-smoker) and my employer pays the other 50%. Therefore, on an annual basis, the healthcare provider receives over $6,000 from me. This does not include my husband or dependants.
In the past 12 months, I have been to the dentist twice for a regular checkup and cleaning and I have been to my GP once. This has been my routine for the past 15 years with the exception of perhaps the odd additional appointment to a chiropractor or physiotherapist.
All the while I have been paying enormous sums of money that I’ve certainly not spent. However, I am grateful to know that should anything go horribly wrong I will be covered and I’ve paid healthily towards that coverage. Given the above, I’ve already paid almost $100,000 to the healthcare provider, of which I’ve spent probably under $6,000.
In the meantime, I exercise 3-5 times a week, I eat a fairly healthy diet and am fortunate enough to be able to say that I almost never get a cold. Some may say I’m lucky. I would disagree and say that my ‘luck’ is a direct result of the choices I make – I am not one of those people who enjoy exercise; I can ALWAYS find something better to do. I also thoroughly enjoy the odd fast food meal but am very aware that fast food along with my favourite local beef or oxtail (with rice and peas, macaroni cheese and plantain of course) needs to be limited to once or twice a month if I do not want to clog up my arteries and cause myself weight issues ultimately leading to health issues.
There are those people with health issues who may never have been overweight and I am not addressing my comments to those people. However, there are NO overweight people without health issues, although some may simply not be aware of them yet. You cannot abuse the body God blessed you with and expect there to be no consequences. Eating too much, drinking too much and smoking are all equal abuses, and just because you don’t smoke or drink does not mean you’re not abusing your body when you eat fried chicken with fries every day.
So I agree wholeheartedly with Sweet Pea’s Viewpoint. I take no pleasure in the fact that it is so absolutely and tragically true; I only wish it hadn’t hit the nail on the head so succinctly but sadly, it did. I don’t think we the people should indirectly be funding healthcare for those persons who clearly don’t do anything to be healthy and there are too many of them.
Those civil servants in a medically acceptable weight range for their age and height, etc, should be offered coverage (perhaps co-pay as the private sector do) whereas those who make poor choices and continue to do so for themselves and their families should be made to contribute more fully and certainly encouraged to make better choices. I would love to see a healthy civil service and agree that trimming the fat in this way has far more positive long term benefits than removing people from their posts.
It seems the government health care is set up because there are those who are uninsurable by any normal health plan, and so instead of saying ‘ok, we’ll cover you when no-one else will’, why not get to the root of the problem and offer to cover these people on the proviso that they make some healthier choices and perhaps set them some goals. Would that not be a better long term solution than simply pouring money into a hole in the ground encouraging further obesity, further health issues, further heart issues and joint issues down the line?
It’s as if we’re burying our heads in the sand simply because we don’t wish to cause offense. Well I find it VERY offensive that we’re all indirectly paying for other people’s poor life choices when I try to make decent ones for myself. The decent life choices aren’t always the most fun but it’s as good as stealing from the next generation when you’re prepared to simply keep taking government money to pay for healthcare that might not be needed if a little more discipline was the order of the day.
Let’s all try and become part of the solution rather than constantly being part of the problem and then wondering why we’ve got no money left to educate our children.