The Editor, Sir:

I have just finished reading Mr. Ken Jones' article, 'Our conflict-causing Constitution', published in The Sunday Gleaner of November 18. While I cannot comment on the suitability of Dr. Stephen Vasciannie for the post of solicitor general, I am concerned by the lack of respect Mr. Jones has shown for the Constitution.

The arguments offered by Mr. Jones to support his contention that the appointment "lacks transparency and does not stand on a firm foundation" are ridiculous. His contention that the decision was made by only three of the members of the Public Services Commission (PSC) is irrelevant. If the other two members were dissatisfied with the process of this appointment, I would expect them to make this dissatisfaction public and resign. By their failure to do so, they must share in the collective responsibility for the appointment.

Absurd claim

His claim that the Cabinet secretary and the president of the Bar Association influenced the decision is absurd. It would seem to me that the PSC has the right to consult with those persons. The final decision would still be their responsibility. Most ridiculous of all was his unsubstantiated assertion that the appointment is part of some "plan to frustrate change and to perpetuate certain practices that flourished to the benefit of personalities rather than the Commonwealth." Talk about grand conspiracy theories!

What concerns me the most is Mr. Jones' statement: "It is not clear whether the commission should retire and permit new appointments by a new Prime Minister. In my view, the present PSC has a moral obligation to demit office." Our system of Government requires an independent public service. It provides needed checks and balances and is critical to the proper functioning of the state.

Change of gov't and retirement

It was not, and could not be the intention of the framers of the Constitution that important public service institutions and personnel should retire every time there is a change in Government, as Mr. Jones suggests should be the case for the PSC. What about the Permanent Secretaries, the Police Service Commission, the Commissioner of Police, the Director of Public Prosecutions, etc. Would Mr. Jones have all these important officers retire after every change in Government?

Finally, I understand from other sources that the Prime Minister may be taking steps to remove the members of the PSC from office. I have no problem with that. Mr. Golding is well within his rights to do that - as long as it is done in accordance with the Constitution.

I am, etc.,

HUGH P. SMYTHE

10 Schooner Court

Westmoorings

Trinidad & Tobago