Court halts action against officer over JLP activity

The Supreme Court has stayed proceedings that could result in the dismissal of a St Elizabeth case-management officer over her alleged involvement in partisan political activity ahead of the general election last year.

The stay bars the Office of the Services Commission and the Attorney General’s Department from taking further action against the officer, Toni Bailey-Cowan, while she challenges the constitutionality of the proceedings.

According to an affidavit filed in April last year, Bailey-Cowan, a case-management officer attached to the St Elizabeth Parish Court, was invited by the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) to attend a consultation in January 2025.

She said it was only after arriving at the January 18 consultation that she learned that it was part of a selection process to identify a candidate to succeed then-sitting St Elizabeth North Western Member of Parliament J. C. Hutchinson.

Bailey-Cowan said she was subsequently summoned to a meeting with officials from the St Elizabeth Parish Court and the Court Administration Division, where she was presented with a letter citing her involvement in political activity.

The letter advised her that the staff orders prohibited public officers from engaging in partisan political activity. She was given a period within which to respond, after which the matter would be referred to the Public Service Commission for further action.

Bailey-Cowan said that at a subsequent meeting, the senior director of human resource management and administration verbally cautioned her that the best course of action would be to resign.

She later received a letter dated February 24 from the Office of the Services Commission informing her that approval had been given for her to be charged by the commission under the Public Service Regulations. She was also informed that an enquiry would be held “with a view to [considering] my dismissal”.

Bailey-Cowan said she subsequently retained an attorney and was advised that “the basis for the dismissal proceedings is unconstitutional. Thereby it would create irreparable damage if the charge were to be carried out before the judicial interrogation of the matters averred”.

VIOLATION OF RIGHTS

She, therefore, brought the matter before the Supreme Court, arguing that the restriction on her political involvement was excessive and violated her constitutional rights under the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms.

She asked the court to stay the proceedings to dismiss her while she challenged the constitutionality of the restrictions and alleged breaches of the rules of natural justice.

When the matter came before the court late last month, the judge granted a stay of proceedings until October 13.

The defendants were also granted an extension of time to file and serve an affidavit in response, skeleton arguments, and a list of authorities by September 16. Bailey-Cowan was permitted to file an additional affidavit, if necessary, by September 30.

The case follows a similar matter involving People’s National Party representative in last year’s general election Dr Aujae Dixon, who was served with an interdiction by the Southern Regional Health Authority suspending him from practising medicine following his election loss.

Dixon, who was practising at May Pen Hospital at the time, challenged the interdiction, also alleging breaches of his constitutional rights.

The ruling paused Dixon’s suspension and allowed him to return to his medical duties at the hospital while the wider constitutional validity of the public-service restrictions on political activity is determined.

karen.madden@gleanerjm.com