Supreme Court was told that the appointment of a New Zealander to a senior Government position was “wrong, dead wrong”.

Bermudian Michael Dolding is suing the Public Service Commission (PSC) after he claimed it did not follow the correct procedure with applicants for the director's role at Marine and Ports, a position given to present incumbent Barry Coupland while Bermudian Francis Richardson was given the director designate role.

The case resumed yesterday with Queen's Counsel Saul Froomkin, who is representing Mr. Dolding, submitting there were a catalogue of unconstitutional, unfair and unreasonable flaws in the interview and appointment procedures.

“If you have a Bermudian and a non-Bermudian, both of whom are fit for the role, even if the non-Bermudian is more fit, the Bermudian must be appointed. That is the statutory framework within which this case must be decided,” Mr Froomkin told the court.

“The PSC purported to recommend a non-Bermudian who did not meet the required mandatory qualifications (for the post), as opposed to a Bermudian who did.

“The PSC purported to appoint Francis Richardson to a post that did not even exist. It is wrong, dead wrong.

“The whole application process was nonsense.”

Mr. Froomkin spent nearly five hours outlining a myriad of reasons why the application procedure, which started in 2000, was not followed correctly.

These included:

The interview panel, which made a recommendation to the PSC, consisted of members who were constitutionally prohibited from being on it;

Application forms were sent overseas before the post was circulated to Government departments;

That Mr. Dolding had the experience and qualifications for the post, and as a Bermuda, should therefore have been given it and not overlooked;

That Mr. Coupland did not fulfil the job requirements as he had have formal management training; and

Mr. Dolding was not told the reasons he didn't get the job

“It was unreasonable to ignore his (Mr. Dolding's) 22 years experience in the department as a senior manager and the time he had spent as acting director during the past seven years,” continued Mr. Froomkin.

“The (interview) panel did not take in to account Mr. Dolding's performance appraisal. And this is critical. Here we have Mr. Dolding with all his appraisals, in which he achieved the highest possible grades, and they were not even considered by the interview panel.

“It was unreasonable for the PSC to recommend him (Mr. Coupland) when didn't have one of the required mandatory qualifications.”

Although Mr. Froomkin stated that neither Mr. Coupland nor Mr. Richardson were on trial, there was much implicit criticism of the two throughout the day as it was asserted that Mr. Dolding should have been the man for the job.

The case continues today.