Attorney General Anand Ramlogan SC recently opined that nothing is wrong with media workers becoming politicians.
In so doing he gave several examples of media personnel, inclusive of PNM Senator Diane Baldeo-Chadeesingh, who made that career transition. He also said this type of career change “does give rise to the question, in every case, whether the media house they came from had this latent political bias that was undisclosed and secreted within the bosom of the organisation and whether it affected the way they covered or carried their newscast”.
Would the AG have made this comment had the transitioning media worker been an accountant or an IT employee as opposed to being a public figure?
More importantly, why didn’t Mr Ramlogan, AG-apparent, object to the recruitment of Herbert Volney, directly from the bench...the intent being to enter the political arena by contesting an electoral seat for the UNC? Didn’t this lack of objection suggest that the judiciary may have had a “latent and political bias that was undisclosed and secreted within its bosom?”
Is this silence in any way related to the proclamation of section 34?