PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad (CMC):

A tribunal set up to determine the fate of embattled Chief Justice Satnarine Sharma will begin hearing evidence on September 17 and has made it clear it's not seeking to determine the guilt or innocence of the judiciary head.

Former Privy Council judge Lord Mustill, who is chairing the tribunal, said he would ensure that the proceedings, expected to last for at least two weeks, would be transparent, independent, economic and effective.

"We are determined that the proceedings will be fair and independent," he said adding, "it is an inquiry into the matter, no more no less. This tribunal cannot remove the Chief Justice. It has no powers to do that."

He explained that its basic function would be to inquire into the matter, report on the facts and "recommend to the President whether he should refer the question of removal of the Chief Justice to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council".

The other members of the tribunal are St. Lucian jurist Sir Vincent Flossiac and Jamaican Queen's Counsel Denis Morrison, who is also a judge with the Court of Appeal in Belize.

Sharma, 64, has been accused by Chief Magistrate Sherman McNicolls of attempting to influence the outcome of the trial of former Prime Minister Basdeo Panday who was charged for knowingly failing to declare to the Integrity Com-mission, a London bank account for the years 1997, 1998 and 1999 when he served asPrime Minister.

Great public importance

McNicolls found Panday guilty on April 24, 2006 and jailed him for two years to run concurrently on each count, fined him TT$120,000 (US$20,000) and ordered that he pay TT$1.6 million (US$266,000) to the State. The Appeal Court has since set aside that ruling and ordered a retrial.

Lord Mustill said the matter before the tribunal was "one of great public importance and interest to everybody in the state" and that while the proceedings would not be allowed to be carried live by television, arrangements would be made for the transcripts of the day's events to be provided to the media.

But lawyers for both the Chief Justice and the Chief Magistrate raised objections to the decision of the tribunal to hear testimony from witnesses without requiring them to take the oath, even as Lord Mustill noted "we shall expect everybody who gives evidence to tell the truth".

Senior Counsel Stanley Marcus, who is representing the Chief Magistrate, said that while the law provided for the tribunal to have that discretion, witnesses should be called upon to swear to the truthfulness of their statement.

But British Queen Counsel Geoffrey Robertson, the lead attorney for the Chief Justice, argued that the charge of misbehaviour against his client was a "serious allegation" and indicated that he would file an objection to witnesses not taking the oath before giving testimony.

Marcus had also objected to a move by the lawyers for the Chief Justice that witnesses ought not to be represented by counsel, noting "it is not only the Chief Justice's interest at stake".