US issues stinging report on "Dudus" extradition

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Matter for Court - Golding

Don't feed the troll
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: evanovitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you think that he is an oppressed member of an underprivileged community? </div></div>

oh please....Dudus has been ACCOMMODATED, TOLERATED, because of the patronage system of Jcan politics....he has his place in the hierachy and in his part of the hierachy , he may be on top but <span style="font-style: italic">the</span> <span style="font-weight: bold">boundaries</span> still r in full effect

y u ting my lady prefer to live in the Motherland rada dan Jamdung..wid all di millions, she still lock out in Ja but ova suh she is the widow ....

Dudus juss happen to live in a new time wen outside influences can do wat is being done now... both parties quake in the wake of the resolution of this, despite di opposition spiel , becausae both have dem 'Duduses' in di shadows waiting to have di US cawl dem up

</div></div>

[andronian2]

Re: US issues stinging report on &quot;Dudus&quot; extradition

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: evanovitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">by the same token, a grand jury can issue anyting because di ongle lawyer allowed in dere is di one representing di interest wanting di people....

di evidence dem present can be anyting n it is all still 'alleged' but since no defense lawyer allowed in deh, grand juries always concur wid evidence presented....

i want all wrongdoers to be called upon an i want dem to investigate how dose who mek it to farrin get approved fi visa....now dat would be interesting indeed </div></div>

But a grand jury is not a trial.
The result is a &quot;true bill&quot;, a conclusion that there is enough to warrant a trial.
So no defense lawyer is needed at a Grand Jury but the defendants would have one for a trial if they weren't running fraid.

What Golding is doing for Dudus is unilaterally shielding him from any sort of judicial process in Jamaica or abroad.
Because apart from the American Grand Jury, a step in the extradition process would require a Jamaican court to decide whether there is a prima facie case against Dudus.
Only if that conclusion were affirmative and he were extradited would be face a TRIAL that could result in a conviction or indeed exoneration.

So with a judicial process in place there seems to be little reason for the PM to upend the tea cart in a case where his integrity would naturally called into question given the obvious ties to his constituency.
Unless there really are some horrible and corrupt undercurrents at work which seems more and more likely with every detail that emerges.
The contracting of the American law firm has obvious ties to this fiasco and the government's denials are hollow since the documents and payments are a matter of public record due to US law.

I went from giving them the benefit of the doubt to being thoroughly convinced this whole thing stinks to high heaven.
Developments over the next few months will be very interesting; grab a seat.

[evanovitch]

Re: US issues stinging report on &quot;Dudus&quot; extradition

a true bill has no truth if ongle one side is presented....if u seek to be able to detain using di true bill , u can seh anyting n di jurors presume dat since u dem rep, u telling di troot ...plus dem juss go along , rubberstamp...if u wan u ting fi go true u can mek sure u ha a veddy receptive juror...

u have an expectation of facts being presented but that is all it is..an expectation cause u stack di deck fi mek u get u ruling u want

an di stacking in dis case is supposedly the visa issue which mekking people focus on credibility being tied to visa issue...i.e.mek him gwane cause wi no want lose di visas....so if law bruk r not it not di important issue...di visa losses r...if u have a case u should not have to use muscle to get ur way...

[andronian2]

Re: US issues stinging report on &quot;Dudus&quot; extradition

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: evanovitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> a true bill has no truth if ongle one side is presented....if u seek to be able to detain using di true bill , u can seh anyting n di jurors presume dat since u dem rep, u telling di troot ...plus dem juss go along , rubberstamp...if u wan u ting fi go true u can mek sure u ha a veddy receptive juror...

u have an expectation of facts being presented but that is all it is..an expectation cause u stack di deck fi mek u get u ruling u want

an di stacking in dis case is supposedly the visa issue which mekking people focus on credibility being tied to visa issue...i.e.mek him gwane cause wi no want lose di visas....so if law bruk r not it not di important issue...di visa losses r...if u have a case u should not have to use muscle to get ur way... </div></div>

You are putting the cart before the horse.
The Grand Jury only has to be convinced that a trial is warranted it does not care about innocence or guilt.
The Grand Jury is an OBSTACLE for the prosecution because they have to go through it even before bringing a case.

Do you want them to skip the Grand Jury and go straight to a trial?
That can be done for lesser charges and it certainly expedites things for the prosecution as it makes easier to bring people to trial.
But as it stands, you're basically arguing that Dudus is above being accused of any crimes and that he has been wronged merely by being being called to face charges.
I wish the rest of us were as much above reproach as he is!

[andronian2]

Re: US issues stinging report on &quot;Dudus&quot; extradition

The visa cancellations seem to be clear diplomatic pressure from the USA.
But as much as Golding claims it is his prerogative to decide what happens to Dudus it is the Americans' prerogative to decide who gets to enter their country.
So if America begins to see Jamaica as a non-cooperative Narcocracy they have every right to start denying visas left right and centre.

For better or for worse, Jamaica has a legal treaty arrangement with the USA that allows Jamaicans to face trial in American courts.
The matter here is not even one of innocence or guilt (yet) but of the unilateral shielding of one man from any legal process by the highest minister of the Jamaican goverment.
The US does not want Dudus extradited immediately nor do they want him to be imprisoned immediately.
They want the process unstopped so that the Jamaican court can do its job as it has done for other extraditions.

Golding must have been concerned that the judiciary was still too independent to blindly do his bidding in this matter and since he can't fire the courts (like the PSC) he'd rather keep them out of it.
Because there is no good reason for the PM himself halting the usual process in this particular case despite his mish-mash of appeals to patriotism, 'human rights' and the constitution.
I am afraid that the unsavoury reasons for his deep personal involvement in this case are the very best reasons for it due to the principle of rational self-interest.
A politician does not squander political capital unless the consequences of not doing so are far worse. So ask not whether there is doodoo but how deep di doodoo is.

[evanovitch]

Re: US issues stinging report on &quot;Dudus&quot; extradition

American HAS ALWAYS enforced their rite to decide who enters their country...it is the draconian visa system they have always had

the attempt to ban people based on supposed narco involvement is as laffable as so many govament henchmen on both sides of Ja's politicl party having had access to visas ....u really tink dat pawt is Shottas is juss literary license on the part of the script written

the chubbling ting wid America is wen she gets on her high horse n decides that finally someting muss be done wid dis one an dat one....people want to point to Dudus being of Bruce's garrison....heh heh, is who him inherit it from....who present day politrixians inherit dem constituencies from going bak to Independence wen patronage went full force based on the British example

Noreiga was allowed to do wat he did in Pananam in di open, be a conduit fi cocoaine until it was decided he was a problem fi some reason...who had been his no 1 ally n prop untill den?


if this is about getting those who do wat dem seh Dudus do , well wat happen to di oddas named in the info given dem by showaa


wat I really hope the people in the garissons learn from all dis is dat wen it came to his life VB INFORMED so dem fi stop mek dem own lives miserable by saying dem naw inform on the thugs dat keep dem locked in fear


the reason behind is concern is valid but is ongle if u look at it wid open eyes

[evanovitch]

We are not sovereign

We are not sovereign


Tuesday, April 06, 2010



Dear Editor,

If the Dudus debacle has highlighted one thing, it is that Jamaica is unsure of itself as an autonomous nation. On the one hand, there is Bruce Golding who refuses to sign the extradition request because doing so would be an affront not only to Mr Coke's constitutional rights, but also to Jamaica's sovereignty. To hand over Mr Coke in such a manner, and at such a time, would be shameful surrender to US dictate, at the expense of Jamaica's ability to think and decide for itself.

On the other hand, there is the larger Jamaican population Their grievance comes not from an alleged attack on the island's sovereignty but is, interestingly enough, concerned with Golding's challenge to the sovereignty of the United States. Jamaican citizens are worried about the ramifications of standing up to the US. To be frank, they are worried about their visas, and in the reality of America's great power status, they have every reason to be.

Yet, the question remains, if the real controversy surrounds the future of US-Jamaica relations, and not the violation by a foreign power of the Jamaican Constitution and Jamaican rights, then where does that leave our right to self-determination? In the scheme of things, where do we truly feel at home: Jamaica House or the White House? Whom are we trying to please? Our neighbours or ourselves?

Judging by this affair, it would seem that Jamaica's dependency on America goes beyond the economic realm. It is a dependency so strong that it encroaches upon the island's self-sufficiency, self-rule, self-government, or - to put it simply - the island's &quot;self&quot;. Delaying Mr Coke's extradition is a futile attempt to deny what the rest of the nation seemingly already knows: Jamaica cannot survive while out of favour with the US because the island is not a sovereign nation.

Jamaica Observer lettes to the editor

[Leddih]

This Must be a Joke

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...speaking at a post Cabinet press briefing a short while ago, the minister with responsibility for information Daryl Vaz said the Government is not satisfied with Mr Brady’s explanation and so it will be taking the matter further. </div></div>
Brady Issue goes to Attorney General

2010-04-07 13:21:20 | with audio | (0 Comments)
The Government has turned over the controversial matter involving local attorney Harold Brady to the Attorney General for action.

Mr Brady has refuted reports that he is a consultant to the Government.

He has also rejected reports that he has a deal with US law firm Manatt Phelps and Phillips, which is acting for the Jamaican Government through his entity, Brady and Company.

However, a document on the website of the US Justice Department, indicates that Mr Brady’s law firm has inked an deal with Manatt, Phelps and Phillips to represent the Jamaican Government.

Mr Brady has said that was an error that has since been corrected and has provided documentation to support his position.

However, speaking at a post Cabinet press briefing a short while ago, the minister with responsibility for information Daryl Vaz said the Government is not satisfied with Mr Brady’s explanation and so it will be taking the matter further.

The US Justice department website indicates that Manatt, Phelps and Phillips is to be paid US$100,000 per quarter for its work on behalf of the Jamaican Government.

The Opposition has been pressuring the Government to clarify the issue.

[evanovitch]

Try ‘Dudus’ here, says KD..heh heh heh heh

Try ‘Dudus’ here, says KD


Thursday, April 08, 2010


OPPOSITION Senator KD Knight yesterday urged the Government to take steps to try West Kingston strongman Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke on Jamaican soil, since it is reluctant to extradite him to the United States to face alleged drug-and-gun trafficking charges. “There is the possibility of prosecuting the person locally. If there is the evidence and you don’t want to send the person abroad and the evidence was gathered here in accordance with the Interception of Communications Act, then prosecute the person here you don’t have to extradite the person,” he said.

Knight, an attorney-at-law and national security minister under the former People’s National Party administration, was speaking during a luncheon of the Lions Club of Kingston at the Jamaica Pegasus Hotel in Kingston.


Opposition Senator KD Knight (left) in conversation with John Patterson, president of the Lions Club of Kingston, at the club's luncheon meeting at the Jamaica Pegasus Hotel in Kingston, yesterday. (Photo: Joseph Wellington)
Opposition Senator KD Knight (left) in conversation with John Patterson, president of the Lions Club of Kingston, at the club's luncheon meeting at the Jamaica Pegasus Hotel in Kingston, yesterday. (Photo: Joseph Wellington) 1/1

The senator, who expressed concern that Jamaicans could suffer because of the Government’s handling of the ‘Dudus’ issue, said he did not think it was right to leave the issue hanging.

Said Knight: “Ministers and prime ministers come and go a dime a dozen but we are custodians, we are trustees and we must ensure that we do that thing that is inimical to the development of Jamaica.”

Knight who said his comments were not to be seen in the light of him taking a swipe at Justice Minister and Attorney General Senator Dorothy Lightbourne, who has responsibility for dispensing with extradition requests — said it could not be denied that extraditions are a ‘political thing’.

“It’s an executive act. The political directorate has the first and last say. The minister responsible for extraditions has to issue an authority to proceed before any extradition request can go to the court,” he noted. In this respect, he pointed out that the statute which was passed in the 1980s by the Jamaica Labour Party, which was in power at the time, only to be withdrawn and passed by the PNP administration in the 1990s clearly sets out the powers of the minister and the powers of the courts.

“The lines may be regarded as blurred in this sense; if a court after hearing the matter decides the person ought to be extradited, the minister still has the jurisdiction to say I am not sending this person.

“There are details a minister doesn’t go into. A minister doesn’t go into admissibility of evidence, that’s for the courts and therefore when I hear that an extradition is being reviewed on the basis that the evidence has been illegally obtained I think that’s a usurpation of the functions of the Court,” Knight argued.

“This extradition request at hand has been badly handled and it has given the impression to the public that it is being dealt with on a partisan basis and that’s wrong,” he continued.

The Opposition senator, at the same time, suggested that the Bruce Golding administration review the areas of the statute it was finding difficult to live with.

“Perhaps it’s time for us to look at the Extradition Act with a view to seeing if there are areas to be amended. If the policy makers who are the legislators are unhappy with aspects of it, they have the jurisdiction to change it. I think there are some areas we should look to amend,” he said.

Knight also recommended that the policymakers invite the Jamaican Bar Association to outline the “areas where it is thought amendments should be made and then relook at the statute rather than behaving in this way”.

The Jamaican Government and the United States have been at cross purposes since August last year when the US Government requested that Coke be extradited to face charges for crimes he allegedly committed there.

But the Government has been holding out, arguing that the electronic evidence against Coke was gathered in breach of Jamaican law. The administration has held that the communication was illegally passed on to US authorities by a member of the Jamaica Constabulary Force who worked in the intercept facility in Kingston.

Government has, however, come under severe pressure from several organisations and individuals for its decision, with several people calling its action partisan.

[Leddih]

Re: Try ‘Dudus’ here, says KD..heh heh heh heh

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: evanovitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Said Knight: “Ministers and prime ministers come and go a dime a dozen but we are custodians, we are trustees and <span style="text-decoration: underline">we must ensure that we do that thing that is <span style="font-weight: bold">inimical</span></span> to the development of Jamaica.”
</div></div>

I am hoping that this is a newspaper typo or a reporter's/editor's error, even a Freudian slip, but I doubt it. I am still hoping that Mr. Knight didn't say it. &quot;Inimical&quot; LOL! I guess that explains their behaviour in Gordon House.

[Leddih]

Correction?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Leddih</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: evanovitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Said Knight: “Ministers and prime ministers come and go a dime a dozen but we are custodians, we are trustees and <span style="text-decoration: underline">we must ensure that we do that thing that is <span style="font-weight: bold">inimical</span></span> to the development of Jamaica.”
</div></div>

I am hoping that this is a newspaper typo or a reporter's/editor's error, even a Freudian slip, but I doubt it. I am still hoping that Mr. Knight didn't say it. &quot;Inimical&quot; LOL! I guess that explains their behaviour in Gordon House. </div></div>

Now I'm sure he said &quot;inimical&quot;.

Correction

Correction

Friday, April 09, 2010

Yesterday's report on Senator KD Knight's address Wednesday to the Lions Club of Kingston headlined 'Try Dudus here, says KD' had an error in the fifth paragraph.

The error had Senator Knight saying &quot;Ministers and prime ministers come and go a dime a dozen but we are custodians, we are trustees and we must ensure that we do that thing that is inimical to the development of Jamaica&quot;.

The correct quote is: &quot;Ministers and prime ministers come and go a dime a dozen but we are custodians, we are trustees and we must ensure that we do nothing that is inimical to the development of Jamaica.&quot;

We regret the error.

[evanovitch]

memba seh PJ did ha extradition problems too wid di US

Gary Spaulding, Senior Gleaner Writer

JAMAICA IS no stranger to conflicts, disagreements, or diplomatic rows with the mighty United States or powerful US-backed organisations.

Past diplomatic stand-offs between the two countries have created graphic imagery of the oft-recited biblical David and Goliath story.

And as it was with much smaller David, <span style="font-weight: bold">Jamaican leaders have refused to back down claiming nobly that they have principle on their side.</span>
Former prime ministers - Michael Manley, Edward Seaga and P.J. Patterson - have, during their tenures, boldly squared off with the United States or its organisations.

Manley's advocacy for social and economic equality in the ideological struggles between the United States and Jamaica in the 1970s is well documented.

Seaga, who had started out as a staunch ally of the Ronald Reagan administration in the early 1980s, would wrestle with the influential International Monetary Fund in the late 1980s.

Patterson initiated diplomatic stand-offs with the United States twice during his tenure - arising from an extradition row in 1992 and the US's alleged involvement in the removal of former Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide in 2004.

<span style="font-weight: bold">The men, who led Jamaica for a total of 35 years in 1972 and 2006, claimed that they had adopted principled positions.</span>
Now the Bruce Golding administration faces its own dilemma with the US.

But it has been a lonely path for the Government as it does not seem to be enjoying widespread support from prominent Jamaicans or influential organisations.

Need time to assess

Political historians say they need more time and information to analyse the periods and factors that motivated the political leaders.

&quot;I think it's impossible to answer the question without a clear understanding of the individual motives for the respective divisions,&quot; said John Rapley.

&quot;You would need to establish what the grounds for the decisions were, what (where relevant) principles were involved, and assess the current case in light of the available evidence.

&quot;To really do this well would require careful study of the individuals' memoirs or, better yet, interviews,&quot; he added.

Michael Burke responded: &quot;I do not remember what exactly it was the specifics when Seaga stood up to the IMF … other than that, everything else were all principled positions.&quot;

But the records show that Seaga collided with the IMF over the pace and nature of economic conditionalities as the political tide turned against the Jamaica Labour Party in 1986.

Seaga refused to budge when the IMF sought to force his hand to devaluate the local currency.

Resisted IMF demand

In Seaga's view, the IMF's original insistence on devaluation was reasonable due to Jamaica's high level of macro imbalances, but later he resisted the IMF's demand for a further devaluation.

The IMF insisted and Seaga, known for his firm and defiant stance, withheld payments as a &quot;negotiating tactic&quot; to get the bank to change its mind on the issue of a further devaluation.

It's understood that the IMF became concerned that this &quot;was a bad example that others may follow&quot;.

Seaga arranged a meeting with then IMF managing director, Jacques de la Rosiere, at a World Bank meeting in Seoul.

Shortly after, in January 1987, he negotiated the pegging of the rate of exchange with the IMF, which lasted through the remainder of the 1980s.

Seaga's predecessor was described in the western international political arena as a fiery leftist and critic of the United States in the 1970s.

Manley was anything but bashful in his first two terms as prime minister, a period which generated great controversy and projected his country into international headlines.

He implemented his brand of 'democratic socialism' two years after he was elected in 1974, much to the dismay of the US.

Manley fearlessly developed closer ties between Jamaica and Fidel Castro's Cuba, and criticised America and other Western countries.

He led the Movement of Non-Aligned Nations into the formation of a New International Economic Order against what he considered the exploitation of the West.

Manley saw Cuba and the Cuban model as having much to offer both Jamaica and the world.

The man who succeeded Manley was quite the opposite in personality and stature, but his political colleagues and rivals learnt quickly that he was no walkover.

Patterson made international headlines in 2004 when, as chairman of CARICOM, he led the regional organisation in the decision to refuse recognition of the Gérard Latortue government in Haiti following the removal of the democratically elected president, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, from office.

Arranged temporary residence

The former Jamaican prime minister arranged for the ousted Haitian leader to take up temporary residence in Jamaica during Aristide's lawsuit against the United States and France accusing them of kidnapping him.

The Patterson-led CARICOM called for a United Nations investigation into Aristide's removal, but were reportedly pressured by the US and France to drop their request.

Some observers suggest the rebellion and removal of Aristide were covertly orchestrated by these two countries.

Twelve years earlier, shortly after Patterson assumed the helm of Government, his administration would run on a collision course with the US.

The diplomatic stand-off took shape when a man being sought by the United States was snatched away due to an administrative mishap in 1992.

On June 12, 1991, an administrative error in the Registry of the Jamaican Court of Appeal - the misplacing of a document confirming Morrison's intention to appeal - led to Morrison being surrendered prematurely to US law-enforcement agents who extradited him to the USA.

The P.J. Patterson administration made unsuccessful diplomatic and legal efforts to have the Americans return him, since he had not been legally extradited.

Imprisoned without parole

In April 1992, Morrison was tried in the Middle District Court, Fort Myers, Florida, and sentenced to 24 1/2 years' imprisonment without parole on cocaine charges.

At the time, the Morrison case generated a lot of discussion in Jamaica and the United States and escalated into an international dispute between the two countries.

<span style="font-weight: bold">The P.J. Patterson administration complained that there had been a breach of its Extradition Treaty with the United States</span>.

The stance of the United States authorities then was whether the accused had an appeal pending elsewhere, or how he had got to the United States in the first place.

Former Justice Minister K.D. Knight told Parliament that on the instructions of Cabinet, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs dispatched two Diplomatic Notes to the US Government.

When the US refused to respond favourably, <span style="font-weight: bold">the P.J. Patterson Government suspended extraditions until the US tidied its systems.</span>
Ironically, as the Bruce Golding administration continues to be enmeshed in the knotty diplomatic row with the United States, over another extradition request, the attorney general and justice minister, Dorothy Lightbourne, is using the 1992 experience to defend the Government's position on the high-profile extradition request for celebrated Tivoli Gardens leader Christopher 'Dudus' Coke.

&quot;<span style="font-weight: bold">It is to be recalled that as a result of the hasty and precipitous action of a former minister of justice, a Jamaican national was improperly and illegally extradited to the US in 1992,&quot; </span>Lightbourne declared.

[evanovitch]

Wise up Dudus

Wise up Dudus
While the Government of Jamaica continues to pussyfoot around the extradition of West Kingston don Christopher “Dudus” Coke to the United States, Jamaica is getting a bad rap on the international scene -causing many Jamaicans at home and abroad to hang their heads in shame. Their beloved country -already beset by a high crime/murder rate- is now approaching the status of rogue nation as Libya once was.

Prime Minister Bruce Golding has taken the noble stance that he is protecting a citizen -Mr Coke’s- constitutional right; he shold not be extradited on the basis of illegally obtained evidence on which Mr Golding says the US government is basing its extradition request. As a Jamaican citizen, I commend Mr Golding for that stance. The trouble is that, as a Jamaican citizen, it is the Courts that I want to defend that right for me, for the simple reason that I might not be in the favour of the Prime Minister (or any other politician for that matter), as Dudus obviously is. He is an influential member of the PM’s West Kingston constituency, which is the political command and control centre of the ruling Jamaica Labour Party (JLP). So influential is Mr Coke to the ruling JLP, that it is alleged that senior members of the party have contracted -at great cost- a US-based law firm to lobby the US Government on Coke’s behalf regarding the extradition request.

If this allegation is true, then it shows that members of the governing JLP, are as eager as Coke himself to ensure that he is NOT extradited to the US.

This means that even if Coke is pursuaded to waive his right to contest the extradition request in the local courts and freely hand himself over to the US authorities for trial, he likely could be opposed by powerful people in the JLP.

My friendly advice to Dudus is to get an independent lawyer or perhaps the Jamaican human rights council and turn himself over to the US diplomatic representatives in Jamaica.

Dudus, take my advice: get yourself a good American lawyer, enter a plea bargain; take a light sentence and come back home. Despite all the hype, many Jamaicans know you are not the big fish; so stop taking licks for other people. Remember what happended to your Daddy!

Wise up Dudus.

http://gleanerblogs.com/thebuckleyreport/?p=20

[Q3210]

Re: Wise up Dudus

Take a light sentence for what? What`s the charge?

[evanovitch]

Gov’t files application for court declaration on extradition

Gov’t files application for court declaration on extraditions
Thursday, 15 April 2010

Lawyers have filed an application in court seeking a declaration on the powers of the Minister of Justice to deal with extradition matters.

Lawyers representing the government filed the matter in the High Court on Thursday.

The matter will be heard on May 5.

Prime Minister Bruce Golding who has been coming under pressure to extradite Tivoli Gardens strongman Christopher &quot;Dudus&quot; Coke announced last month that his administration would be seeking the declaration.

On Monday, a highly placed source close to the case told RJR News that the application would be filed by noted constitutional attorney Dr. Lloyd Barnett.

The Prime Minister has been at odds with the US government since the request for the extradition of Mr. Coke was served in August last year.

In February, Mr. Golding told Parliament that his government cannot facilitate the extradition request because the evidence gathered against Mr. Coke was obtained in contravention of Jamaica's wiretapping laws.

But this position by the Prime Minister has not gone down well with the People's National Party, the Private Sector Organization of Jamaica, the Jamaica Chamber of Commerce and the Independent Jamaica Council for Human Rights.

They have called on Mr. Golding to allow the courts to deal with the extradition matter.

Former Justice Minister A.J. Nicholson has described the government's decision to apply for the declaration as a smoke-screen.

He said the Justice Minister already has the powers to deal with extradition matters if they contravene Jamaica's laws.