Wednesday May 17th: Jesus is the way, the truth and the life
May 17, 2023
Continue practising good hygiene
May 17, 2023

Seek a spirit of wisdom…

The recent Brent Thomas fiasco has brought some profoundly serious issues to the fore and demands honest and unbiased responses from Minister Fitzgerald Hinds, Minister of National Security.
In his reported reaction to the determination by High Court Judge Devindra Rampersad that Thomas’ detention, arrest and subsequent forcible return from Barbados to Trinidad by the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service was illegal, the Minister stated that “criminals have friends everywhere in this country”. In other words, that criminals have established connections and made inroads in several arms of the State, including the Judiciary, the Police Service, the Customs, the Immigration, the Defence Force and the Parliament, which according to, is that “arm of state entrusted with the responsibility of making laws for good governance, and providing oversight of the Government or Executive.”
First of all, what precisely is Minister Hinds imputing about Mr Thomas? Has the Minister assumed the stance of judge, jury and even possibly executioner? Has he, unilaterally, found him guilty of law-breaking, of criminal behaviour?
A dangerous precedent has been established here where a citizen, legitimately in transit in Barbados and on his way to seek medical attention in Miami, is unlawfully denied his right to travel and to receive needed medical attention by a legal agency of his own land.
This must be condemned in all quarters. It raises the possibility of abuses against law-abiding citizens by the Government, based on the slightest suspicion of unproven wrongdoing or at the whim of a governmental authority intent on forcing his will on others.
In addition, unless Minister Hinds has incontrovertible proof to support his declaration of criminality in and among those arms and agencies of the State charged with the application of justice and the safety and security of our country and unless he is willing to present such evidence in a court of law, he must retract his words and ensure that his imputations are expunged from the records and from the minds of the citizens of this country.
Of course, as the proverb says, his words, once flown, cannot be caught or recalled, for they have already nestled in the consciousness of the public mind.
We await, with faith and hope, a resolution to the imbroglio which this case has presented. Attorney General Reginald Armour, has defended Minister Hinds by stating that he is “satisfied that it was not the intention of the Minister, in any way, to impugn the integrity of the Judiciary of this country…” and by affirming his belief that “Hinds, like all members of the Government of this country, has a healthy respect for the integrity and exceptional competence of the Judiciary.”
The Attorney General’s stance does not, by any means, excuse the seeming careless and certainly very injudicious wording of Minister Hinds’ statement.
This country deserves the care and commitment of elected representatives who sincerely seek “a spirit of wisdom and perception” (letter of St Paul to the Ephesians 1:17–23) so that they may exercise their authority according to the will of Almighty God.