CATEGORY:LETTER -------------------- INSIDE GRENADA THURSDAY August 9,2007 by Sandra C. Ferguson Dr. Francis Alexis Political Leader People’s Labour Movement c/o Chambers, Lucas Street St. George’s Dear Dr. Alexis, Re Resentencing Grenada 13 I write to you in my PRIVATE, INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY. I write to you in your capacity as Political Leader of the People’s Labour Movement and also as someone who is considered a LEGAL LUMINARY - a distinguished and acknowledged expert on the issue of Constitutional Law, both in Grenada and regionally. Over the last two years, yours has been a strident voice advocating • the protection of the Judiciary from undue political interference and • respect for the rule of law and the constitution. You have represented the Hon. Member of Parliament for the Town of St. George on constitutional matters, brought by the Government in an effort to unseat him as the people’s representative of the Town of St. George. It was therefore with great interest and attention that I listened to your opinion, aired on Sundays with George Grant programme of July 1st , on the recent ruling of Justice Francis Belle in the re-sentencing of the Grenada 13, since your opinion is considered INFORMED and OBJECTIVE. I understood you to say: • The sentencing was part of due process in keeping with the rule of law. • There was no reason for Justice Francis Belle to recuse himself from the proceedings. • The sentence handed down by Justice Belle was in keeping with the guidelines laid down by the Privy Council and was not unexpected. I therefore wish to draw to your attention, an article entitled, The Big Set Up, authored by Dr. Terence Marryshow which appeared on page 15 in the July 5th, issue of the Spice Isle Review. In this article, Dr Marryshow suggests/implies: • Justice Belle was not impartial because of his alleged former connections with the defendants and makes reference to an affidavit sworn to by one Nelson Louison. • There was COMPLICITY INVOLVING THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court- “…who eyewitnesses identified as being in the same hotel with the Judge on the night before the sentence was handed down” Dr. Marryshow’s article goes on to speculate ..”Was the Chief Justice’s presence in Grenada purely coincidental or was it a case where the Acting Chief Justice who has a PERSONAL AXE TO GRIND AGAINST GRENADA FOR NOT SUPPORTING HIS CANDIDACY FOR CHIEF JUSTICE, NOT TAKING ANY CHANCES DECIDED TO PERSONALLY COME TO GRENADA TO ENSURE THAT THE RIGHT DECISION WAS MADE?” • THERE WAS A SET –UP INVOLVING THE CHIEF JUSTICE, THE JUDGE AND THE PROSECUTION. The article goes on to state, “It is a well-known fact that the government is not happy with the present DPP”. • Because the Government of Grenada will not support the candidacy of the Acting Chief Justice to be Chief Justice, the decision was an attempt to EMBARRASS THE GOVERNMENT and show them who is boss. Dr. Alexis, I have brought article this to your attention because I understand that Dr. Marryshow is the CHAIRMAN of the People’s Labour Movement. I know that the article represents his OWN PERSONAL VIEWS and I fully respect Dr. Marryshow’s right to express personal opinions on the matter of the judgment. Since the demise of the revolution, Dr. Marryshow has held steadfast to a position which seems to suggest that there were GOOD GUYS and BAD GUYS. The bad guys killed the good guys. With his belief steeped in this simplicity, he is understandably upset over the outcome of the re-sentencing. Dr. Marryshow has no obligation to forgive or forget. I respect his right to be displeased and/or disagree with the judgment. However, I am APPALLED AT THE IRRESPONSIBILITY and the VULGAR,ITY TO WHICH DR. MARRYSHOW HAS SUNK – an attempt to BRING INTO DISREPUTE the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Acting Chief Justice. It is UNBELIEVABLE and VERY, VERY SAD. (As an aside, permit me to comment that this certainly could NOT be the stuff of which genuine revolutionaries are made!!) I also bring this matter to your attention, Dr. Alexis, because I know that during the last election, Dr. Marryshow presented himself as a candidate under the auspices of the People’s Labour Movement - to be considered for public office as one of the people’s representatives. Over the last 23 years, he has advocated hate and divisiveness in the name of justice for those killed on October 19th, 1983. He has presented himself many times at the polls and each time the people (God bless them!) have spoken very loudly and roundly rejected him. However, this article, The Big Set- Up , is really the final straw. It may be that I am being presumptuous and pre-emptive. Nonetheless, should the matter of candidacy arise, I trust that the PLM will consider very critically and carefully Dr. Marryshow’s suitability to be a candidate in the next elections. Thank you for the opportunity to bring this matter to your attention. Kind regards! Sincerely yours, Sandra C.A. Ferguson c/o P.O. Box 750 St. George’s c.c Dr. Terence Marryshow