LETTER TO EDITOR: No need for COI attorneys to be called to BVI Bar
Dear Editor,
I feel compelled as a resident in this territory to join in the chorus as to whether the three Lawyers from the COI are in breach of the Legal Profession Act 2015.
According to the Honourable Attorney General (AG), the three lawyers were appointed by her pursuant to section 13 of the COI Act.
If that is correct, then section 19(1a) of the Legal Profession Act is triggered, and the trio are considered law officers within the AG’s office pursuant to section 95(4) of the Virgin Islands Constitution Order 2007.
The said trio, according to section 19(2) of the Legal Profession Act are now deemed to be the holder of a valid Practicing Certificate and to be Legal Practitioners.
The AG is then required, pursuant to section 19(3) of the said Act, to sign and issue a Certificate to the Law Officers as in the form of Schedule 3.
It is my humble view that there is no need for the trio to make a formal application to be admitted to the Bar for the purposes of the COI.
However, once the COI is over, the deeming proviso of section 19(2) of the said Act would not apply to them, and they would now need to be admitted to the Bar in order to pursue private work in the territory.
I do hope my humble opinion would assist in clearing up this legal conundrum that has gripped the territory. Let us unite and focus our energies on the COI and their recommendations.
Peace and Love,
Attorney-at-law, Stephen Daniels
Copyright 2024 BVI News, Media Expressions Limited. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed.
It’s embarrassing how many ‘legal practitioners’ call themselves attorneys-at-law here when the concept does not exist in the BVI!
The concept does exist as part of the Common Law duuuuuh
The CoI Lawyers are not employed by a statutory body, and section 19(1)(b) has no application. Moreover, the AG has not signed a section 19(3) certificate.
Read and understand …it says “Or” so Section 19 1(a) stands
Did you read (a) – nobody, not even the b***y Commissioner, says it applies. S****d is as s****d does.
Please explain. It’s not a title or profession in England either.
It’s not a great start from a lawyer….
It exists because of the Legal Profession Act, 2015.
Thank you Mr Daniels. I do not see the trio as currently practising law because they are asking questions in a manner in which they are trained. I suspect that they do intend to practise some law after the COI is over, thus the reason for the applications to be called to the bar.
Our focus needs to be in the right place, i.e. making amends where necessary.
They working so they are practicing law by their profession. You all now turn judge but the trio is guilty.
Lol
The law as written by man is so twisted, round about and full of loop holes. Look how many acts must be read to get to one understanding.
No wonder the saying is lawyers are always liars.
GOSH!!!!
Very well said Mr.Daniels. You did your research unless others.
Many of us have known this all along. Shame on silk legal and the speaker just raping the country on a frivilous case.
It is embarrassing how many people we have here sitting in power that don’t know the laws for the government in which they sit……..smdh
I wondered when somebody was finally going to raise that point.
Dear counsel …one thing that is clear from your submission is that the Attorney General must have first signed the necessary certificate. Do your research and determine if this had first been done before you produce your “informed” opinion.
take her to Court if she did not My learned friend.
Well if she didn’t take her to Court…add it to your existing case lol
I still want to know, given that the appointment of Silk Law was most definitely going to exceed the petty contract threshold of $100k whether the appointment of legal services went out to tender? As this is spending tax payers dollars and is for the defense of the country it seems completely odd to appoint a tiny unknown firm called Silk Legal?
The good thing about this scenario is that we are being educated on the law and how the law works .and at the end of it we are going to see who got SCHOOLED
What isnt your business, leave it alone
Definately sould have gone to tender – but honestly I don’t think any of the reputable law firms here would have touched it with a pole. Defending the indefensible…
The good thing about this scenario is that we are being educated on the law and how the law works .and at the end of it we are going to see who got SCHOOLED
As a lay person I already surmised that the only reason that they would seek to be licensed as lawyers outside of the COI act is if they will be part of the legal team handling the proceedings to be brought following the COI.
I am not sure how or why Silk have been advising our wigged friend to continue wasting public funds.
Old people use to say when you meet an a** ride it>
@awa. That is correct ride it for every penny it has. Except this is the people’s money and they should object to the waste voraciously.
Why wasn’t the contract with Silk Legal put out for tender? I am sure it has exceeded the 100k threshold by now. The COI needs to look into this. The same rule applies for all government spending.
Interesting indeed, however it is the Governor who must appoint the COI trio on the advice of the JLSC since it is that Commission which appoints law officers.
The governor appoints the Commissioner and the AG appoints the COI Counsel. Thats why the appointment of the Commissioner himself is not in question but rather the Counsel of the COI.
For all intent and purposes, can her action in granting approval to the trio to act as lawyers for the Commission be deemed intention to subsequently grant the certificate? To act as lawyers for the Commission, can same be construed as legal practitioners? Is the COI’s sole Commissioner deemed to be practicing law in the territory?
are these people practicing law? This is neither a hearing not a trial, it is a Comission of Inquiry: an investigation. Why have the people agreed to pay millions of taxpayer dollars for specialists to interfere with an investigation?