LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
NEED FOR SPEEDIER JUSTICE
Sir, I have followed recent media articles on the Chief Justice’s call for speedier justice and feel obliged to participate in the debate following a letter which appeared in the Seychelles Nation edition of Wednesday 27th September 2006 in which the author, Mr Samuel Gappy, recounted his experience before courts.
It is indeed most regrettable that after a year before the courts, a civil suit filed by Mr Gappy has not received a defence which Mr Gappy attributes to “the lawyer who hates the existing judicial system” and who is “playing delaying tactics”. He seems to imply that the Chief Justice’s speech will, as if by magic, bring more efficiency and speedier procedure to the court.
However, we seem to have lost sight of the fact that the judge is always the sole arbitrator in his court and any problems encountered in his court must, at the end of the day, fall squarely on his shoulders alone. That is why the judicial system is equipped with and based on laws which lay down the rules in black and white so that all participants in the legal process can see just what it is they have to do and just what are the consequences of not doing it.
All civil cases are governed by a set of rules called the Code of Civil Procedure which can be consulted by any interested party under Chapter 213 of the Laws of Seychelles. This Code is the bible for lawyers and judges alike as it establishes the manner in which civil suits are drawn up, filed and proceed through the courts. It clearly explains how plaints must be served on the defendant, providing detailed instructions of how to serve on all different types of defendants, even on those outside the country or for the case where the defendant cannot be found.
On the date that the case is called for the first time, the defendant can appear in person or, as in Mr Gappy’s case, through a lawyer. The Court is obliged to give the defendant time to present a defence but if the defence is not presented within the time offered and the judge is not satisfied with the reasons being advanced for the failure to produce the defence, the judge can proceed to hear the case without a defence or fix the hearing ex-parte, that is to hear only the plaintiff’s side.
Any judge worth his salt and aware of the Code of Civil Procedure would know that he could have proceeded with Mr Gappy’s case much earlier, especially if he knew that the lawyer was using delaying tactics. In this way, the judge would have expedited justice in Mr Gappy’s case and, more importantly, would set a precedent to remind lawyers that they would have to be more serious in the manner in which they handled their cases. In the end, the judicial system would run on well-greased wheels without speeches and media coverage.
Nichole Tirant
THE TAIL WAGGING THE DOG
Sir, I read with some trepidation a letter signed by one Samuel Gappy which appeared in the Nation on 27th September. The writer claims that “lawyers who hate the existing judiciary system (sic) are playing the delaying tactics for personal gain”.
The questions that come to mind are:
• Does it include his own lawyer? If so he should name, shame and sack him or her.
• Is he telling us that in our country a judge is the tail while the lawyer(s) is the dog? If so he should equally publicly name the judge who is allowing this perversion of the course of justice to persist.
Justice belongs to the citizen (us) not the judges or the lawyers. Judges and lawyers are mandated to dispense justice. The politicisation of the judiciary by one political faction with the reigns of power is the reason why Mr Gappy is now the victim of that judiciary and its court system. That is why too, after 13 years, that same political faction with the reigns of power has never seen it fit to publish our Constitution and make it available to all so that the citizen who can read will know their rights and obligations for themselves.
Mr Gappy should remove his blinkers and ask his President what his rights are rather than rely on small mercies and political privileges. He would be pleasantly surprised what he would find.
James Doe