L’Express of 7 August reports that the lawyer representing the Chief Inspector of Police Rajesh Moorghen has requested that Me Gayle Yerriah be revoked as a member of the Equal Opportunities Commission. Because she does not reckon at least 5 years practice. Mr Moorghen is seeking redress at the EOC for injustice apparently meted against him by the former Commissioner of Police.
According to her LinkedIn page Me Yerriah did mini pupilage, was a trainee and did further pupilage in renown chambers, was a Board Director of ICTA from April 2015 to April 2016. She was sworn as Barrister at law in January 2013 and nominated as Member of the EOC in May 2016.
Now L’Express reports that ‘’pressée de questions Me Gayle Yerriah aurait avoué avoir moins de 5 ans d’experience comme le requiert l’EOC pour tout membre du Board.’’
In Le Défi Quotidien of the 7 May this barrister says she owes her nomination to the EOC on the basis of her competence not on the basis of her ‘’appartenance au MSM” which she joined in 2014 ‘’ pour les valeurs de justice et la place qu’il accordait aux femmes, ce qui correspondent à mes idéaux’’.
The Code of Ethics for Barristers came into operation in 1998. In 2011 the Office of the Attorney-General published a bound copy of the Code of Ethics which is distributed to callees at each call ceremony. The Code encompasses a combination of ‘’integrity, honesty, courage, commitment, common sense, perseverance’’. Me Gayle Yerriah would have obtained her copy which in the words of former Chief Justice Bernard Sik Yuen is ‘’ a bedside reading material for all barristers.’’
A barrister needs 5 years practice in her portfolio as a minimum to be nominated Member of the EOC. The Member who hasn’t is therefore not eligible. How come this nomination has been made? Who are the liars? Who haven’t verified the materials? Was this yet another nomination of the MSM stable? And how absent minded would have been the present Attorney General?
This is too serious to be ignored. If what is reported by L’Express then there is another dirt on the hands of the MSM to clean. The EOC has to resume its activities although the Leader of the Opposition objected to the nomination of another member Ashok Shibchurn a MSM activist in Constituency No 10.
Note Art 27.1 of the Code: ‘’A barrister shall never knowingly give false or misleading information to the Court’’ the provisions of which are not confined to inside the Court Room.
Now the resignation of Me Yerriah is not the end of this inelegant story. Will she reimburse whatever allowance she has obtained in her capacity as member of the EOC?
Will the appropriate authorities call her to give an explanation on this departure from basic ethics?
There are other nominees who have to take the exit as this barrister has done. Prakash Maunthrooa is one of them. We are the laughing stock of private conversations in important circles here and abroad. But should we be surprised when a MP having lied to the police is still in office? Clearly the P.M is not in control.
Dr Kwan
10.08.16