The Editor, Sir:

The important pillars upon which all civilised societies are based are law, order and justice. The non-observation of law leads to anarchy, the absence of order leads to chaos and inconsistent or capricious interpretation of laws makes a mockery of justice resulting in tyranny.

Batsman Marlon Samuels had a two-year ban from playing cricket at all levels imposed upon him purported as the penalty for breaching the ICC Code of conduct for Players and Officials Rule C4 Subsection (1X).

This rule and the prescribed penalty are part of the amended rules which arose from meetings of the ICC in March and June of 2007.

The date on which the rules were established and ratified is extremely important to this case because of a fundamental principle of law that prohibits a person from being guilty of an offence which predates the law for which he is accused of breaching.

Charade of enquires

Similarly, penalties must be applied as per the law that existed at the date of the offence, rather than the date of trial if the penalty is more severe at the time of trial.

The answers to the following questions will clearly determine whether justice was served by the enquiry or whether it was just a charade that inflicted injury upon Samuels while it evaded the fundamental of justice.

On what date was the alleged breach committed?

On what date was the enquiry held?

The breach of what rules were enquired into?

The penalty was prescribed using what rules?

We know that the enquiry and the subsequent punishment were based on Rule C4 subsection (1X). It is also a fact that the penalty for such a breach did not carry the two-year minimum ban at the time the breach was committed.

We have seen public statements made by members of the investigating tribunal that had it not been for the stipulation of the two-year minimum, they would have recommended a less stringent penalty.

A nullity

The fact that Samuels was found guilty of and punished under a rule and punishment that was not in existence at the date of the alleged offence make the exercise a nullity.

This young man has had his career interrupted at a critical time causing severe financial losses, in addition to damaging of his reputation as an honest person. He has been smeared internationally and to his peers, friends and associates.

This nullity has caused him much emotional suffering in addition to the foregoing. Justice demands that Marlon Samuels' ban be lifted with immediate effect and that he be compensated for the sufferings and loss of income he experienced as a result of the imposed penalty in the circumstance.

If the ICC and its agents in this matter and the WICB are not prepared to make speedy amends, the court of the land must be asked to correct this gross miscarriage of justice.

I am, etc.,

LUCIUS C. WHITE

1 Tankerville Avenue,

Kingston 6