WHEN one is taken to court for some offence, be it civil or criminal, and one is wrong (or guilty) and one has the financial means to hire the best defence lawyers available to essentially beat the system ? that's what one does. We now call it the OJ defence (although it could be called the Claus von Bulow strategy as that socialite was charged with attempting to murder his multi-millionaire wife, Sonny, long before the OJ incident. Von Bulow hired Alan Dershowitz ? one of the US's best ? and he prevailed with a not guilty verdict). But even if the well-heeled defendants are found not guilty in such circumstances, it should be noted they are not deemed innocent.

Guess who's pulling an OJ? The Minister of Labour, Home Affairs & Public Safety, our very own Randy Horton. His ill-written and ill-advised amendment to the standing law on real property sales was thrust on an unsuspecting public on February 8, 2005 with no consultation afforded to experts in the realty profession or us, the Bermudian voters. It was rightfully defeated in court in favour of the Bermudians who brought the action. Objections to this ill-thought out and draconian policy amendment are widespread.

They include:

1)This badly worded amendment was thrust upon us by a Government with no grasp of the basic economic effects it would produce and no consideration as to its constitutional illegality on many grounds.

2)Neither related professionals (i.e. Chamber of Commerce Real Estate Division, etc.) nor the public were consulted to give expert opinions on its likely effect

3)The policy blatantly discriminated against Bermudians in favour of non-Bermudians

4)The policy not only did not achieve its supposed goals (mentioned below), but actually detracted from them.

5)The policy devalued Bermudian owned homes over the Average Rental Value of $126,000 ? translated, that means this law instantly removed realisable asset value from a segment of its people without due process or restitution.

And rightfully the first Bermudians to challenge this unconstitutional amendment in the Supreme Court of Bermuda, Mr and Mrs Alan Marshall, prevailed based on Justice Bell's ruling that:

1) The law unlawfully discriminates against Bermudians in favour of non-Bermudians

2)There was no evidence that the amended policy did anything to further the public interest or improve the housing crisis

3)The amended policy, as written, does not provide for the Minister to circumvent it in individual cases where merited - i.e. where Bermudians relied on the policy that has prevailed for years (until the February 2005 amendment) to their financial detriment

4)The law amounts to an abuse of power.

The plaintiffs were represented by the talented former Attorney General, Saul Froomkin. And, naturally, the Government was represented by the Attorney General's Chambers ? Mr. W. Bourne, Mr. M. Johnson and Ms K. Thomas, who have been excused from leading the appeal.

Here's where the OJ defence comes in.

This defence is only available to those with the money to pay for the best legal defence team in the world. Why does one need such expensive heavy hitters in the first place? Need I state the bleeding obvious? The defendants in such situations know they don't have a snowball's chance in hell of victory without bringing in the top guns.

Likewise, the Minister has deemed it necessary to circumvent the Immigration and work permit laws that apply to the rest of us in order to hire the biggest gun in Administrative Law practice to defend his policy because it is wrong. The original case was tried by the Attorney General's chambers, should be the case. The professionals within the AG's chambers are hired and paid to try or defend any and all actions for or against Government. If specific expertise is not available within the AG's staff then they may seek to use one of the many experienced barristers already working on the island. So why haven't they at least done that? God knows, the one area of professional talent that we do not lack is legal expertise. It seems our Minister Horton has not only deemed the entire AG chambers as incompetent to represent his position in the appeal but also the entire population of barristers in Bermuda (except Narinder Hargun who is currently representing the Government in the Pro-Active dispute and I assume is too busy to take this case). And they should all be rightfully outraged.

I have spoken with one of Bermuda's top barristers and a few partners of local law firms who unanimously confirm that there is no justifiable reason to bring in this foreigner given the available expertise within their firms if, indeed, nobody within the AG's chambers is deemed competent enough. So there you have it, folks?another abuse of power.

Guess who has to approve the granting of a work permit to the English QC? Yup, Randy Horton's own Immigration Department. And what's more, we taxpayers have to pay for it ? his fees, his first class transport, lodging, food etc?..all because the Minister knows his policy is wrong but he still wants to win. I, for one, shall make some time to go and watch the OJ defence in action (after all, in some small way, like you all, I am paying for it against my will.)

As mentioned earlier, this poorly written amendment actually failed to state and support the Minister's reasoning for its adoption. This lack of intent by the Minister was noted by the wise Justice Bell and formed a part of his decision. He rightfully stated the Minister's broad-brush assertions that the amended policy would serve the public interest and ameliorate the housing crisis were nebulous and not backed up by any supporting explanation and rationale.

We are not living in a totalitarian state where dictators never explain their actions save to profess that they serve the public interest. And we all know that any dictatorial edicts handed down anywhere with no public consultation under the guise of "serving the public interest" tend to do just the opposite. Just like this one.