Justice Stanley John of Trinidad headed to Bahamas…BP concern? CLICO!


4-1a_justice_stanley_john_2<<< Justice Stanley John of Trinidad.

Trinidad — John said yesterday that by the end of the week, President George Maxwell Richards will have his resignation letter.

However, he says he prefers not to comment on the matter before the President is informed, since he believes it is inappropriate for the public or anyone else to know before the President.

He also confirmed that he will be leaving the judiciary to take up a position as Appeal Court judge in the Bahamas.

Justice John’s resignation comes after more than a decade in the judiciary, where he currently sits as an Appeal Court judge, which is among the most senior positions after the Chief Justice.

His tenure is not without controversy, however. He was a key defender of former chief justice Satnarine Sharma, when he was accused of attempting to pervert the course of justice in 2006.

Justice John was thrust into the limelight when details of a call he made from Sharma’s home phone was leaked to the media, in the attempt by the State to arrest Sharma in violation of a court injunction in 2006.

Sharma was subsequently vindicated of any wrongdoing by the Mustill tribunal in 2007.

And only last week, Justice John was again thrust into public controversy after his strong criticisms of two Tunapuna magistrates, Anna Ryan and Jo-Anne Connor, for handing down what he termed excessive sentences. He had suggested that they resign if they did not understand the country’s laws.

The Magistrates and Criminal Bar Associations criticised Justice John’s comments and by last Friday, Chief Justice Ivor Archie apologised for the comments and said they were not his own sentiments.

It is understood that Justice John’s resignation has nothing to do with this controversy.


  1. Is it just me or does the Government only ever bring foreign male judges here to sit on the bench…

    I don’t have a problem with foreign judges though, for a time being they have no connections to make them biased. The problem begins when they stay too long and start getting too famaliar. They should bring then in on contract then release them afterwards.

  2. How many more foreign judges will this country have to pay hefty pensions to? It is unfortunate that the government is not canvassing senior lawyers for the position. Unemployment up to 14%, civil servants about to be fired, slow economy and another foreigner nothing is known about is about to be appointed to the highest court in the land. From the looks of it he is a young man and will be here, untouchable, protected by the Constitution for a very long time.

  3. The Speaker has shown that when you let persons get away with thuggery then it always comes back to burn you.Before the General Elections of 2007 Alvin Smith was the worst rule breaker in the HOA and just so no precedent was set the then Govt refused to have him named.Well muddo look who is now making the rules.Just goes to show that when one is allowed to get away with infringements they will continue offend.Case in point is the present judge who has been suspected of wanting must not be allowed to get on our high court as history has a strange way of repeating itself.

  4. @Altec Altec it would be good if BP get the video because many of the regular bloggers might have been working or sleeping and missed it.

  5. Dibbles :
    was any one watching the Parliment,I agree with Ms.Hanna Martian she had a point to make and her point should have be made.

    Wasnt watching but i got a text telling me to get to a tv and watch ch 40. I hope BP can get the video of this and post it.

  6. was any one watching the Parliment,I agree with Ms.Hanna Martian she had a point to make and her point should have be made.

  7. We do not need this judge as he showed poor judgement in the Trinidad case involving Sharma.We already have successive Cabinets in the Bahamas who despite much evidence to condemn colleagues take the nobody move ,nobody get hurt strategy.Why should Bahamains feel enthustiastic about this move?Too much of the same old,same old.Who on the Judiciary feels obligated to repay a favor at our expense?Can we feel that the law would be on our side in matters involving the state?There is no need to take chances as I see plenty smoke where this Judge is concerned.

Comments are closed.