General > General Discussion
Ish Galbaransingh in jail.
Flex:
Ish’s lawyers looking at Jack’s statement
By Radhica Sookraj (Guardian).
One of the men implicated in the Section 34 fiasco, UNC financier Ishwar Galbaransingh, says his attorneys are reviewing Jack Warner's recent allegations that he gave bribes to Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar.
Speaking briefly to the T&T Guardian after the opening of the Brickfield Packing House in Tabaquite yesterday, Galbaransingh refused to reveal whether the allegations were true or not, saying he will not dignify that with a response.
It has been a week since the accusation was made but despite this, Galbaransingh said no decision has been taken to sue Warner.
Asked whether it was true that he paid bribes amounting to $8 million to Persad-Bissessar, Galbaransingh said: “I cannot dignify anybody’s nonsense with a response.”
Asked whether he was taking any action against Warner for defamation, Galbaransingh said: “My lawyers are looking at it and I will let my lawyers respond.”
Pressed further as to whether Warner could expect another lawsuit, Galbaransingh said: “I never said anything about a lawsuit. I said my lawyers are looking at it.” He declined any further questions.
During a press conference last week, Warner said he was present when Galbaransingh and Steve Ferguson allegedly gave Persad-Bissessar cheques amounting to over $8 million.
Warner had said: “In the run-up to the general election of May 2010, Mrs Kamla Persad Bissessar held several discussions with me on how we could assist Ish Galbaransingh and Steve Ferguson since she felt they were both instrumental in removing the PNM from office in 1995 and had been poorly treated by the Manning administration.
“In one of those meetings which was held at the Gopaul’s residence in Tunapuna and at which I was present, Mr Galbaransingh and Mr Ferguson handed over to Mrs Persad-Bissessar a number of cheques totalling $8.3 million.”
Warner also spoke of the Section 34 amendment of the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act 2011, saying it was “exposed for the deceit that is was.”
He also alleged that Persad-Bissessar was now trying to extradite him to the US because she wanted to appease the US Government for her mishandling of the Ish and Steve extradition.
Meanwhile, Works Minister Dr Suruj Rambachan also accused the media of supporting Warner’s deceit by not investigating the allegations before publishing.
“I am not going to dignify Mr Warner in any way. Warner is feeding off a hungry media and it is unfortunate that they are not checking the facts before they publish it. Therefore, in a sense, they are party to this kind of charade,” he said.
Last week Persad-Bissessar also denied all of Warner’s allegations, saying she would speak to her “lawyers about ending his malicious actions.”
Galbaransingh and Ferguson were first indicted in a Miami Federal Court in 2005 on 95 fraud and money laundering charges.
The charges arise out of alleged bid rigging between 1996 and 2005 on contracts for the Piarco International Airport. In 2011, the US Embassy expressed disappointment with the decision by the High Court not to allow the extradition of the two businessmen to face fraud charges.
In December 2011 the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act was enacted by both Houses of Parliament and received the assent of then President George Maxwell Richards on December 16, 2011.
Included in the Act was Section 34 which prescribed a limitation period of ten years in respect of certain offences, excluding treason, murder, kidnapping rape, assault, drug trafficking and arms and ammunition possession. Both men, along with 37 others, were set to walk free with the passage of the legislation.
On September 10, 2012, Director of Public Prosecutions Roger Gaspard, SC, wrote to Attorney General Anand Ramlogan indicating his concern with Section 34 and its implications for the pending Piarco prosecutions. Three days later Section 34 was repealed following a special sitting of Parliament.
Bourbon:
http://m.guardian.co.tt/news/2015-07-22/suruj-why-should-unc-stay-away-ish
Suruj: Why should UNC stay away from Ish?
Given the political heat surrounding Ish Galbaransingh and allegations of bribery over Section 34, senior members of Government are still insisting he remains free to bid for State projects.
Galbaransingh won the bid for the construction of the $14 million Brickfield Packing House which was opened on Monday in Tabaquite. His company Aztec Asphalt Pavers Ltd was responsible for completing the facility in record time.
In an interview yesterday, Works Minister Dr Suruj Rambachan said he did not agree that the UNC should distance itself from Galbaransingh and his company in light of allegations by ILP leader Jack Warner that businessman Steve Ferguson allegedly paid $8 million in bribes to Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar.
Warner was expected to provide evidence of the alleged bribes in a press conference yesterday but it was postponed.
In an email, Warner said an additional piece of information had surfaced and needed to be verified. He also said the inclement weather would pose a difficulty for some persons who wished to attend the press conference.
Galbaransingh, in an interview, said his attorneys were reviewing Warner’s accusations.
However, Rambachan said despite the issue, Galbaransingh should not be banned from bidding for projects.
“Those were public bids and if Galbaransingh wins the bid, he cannot be denied because he is free to bid and tender for any project,” Rambachan said.
He added: “I don’t think the UNC should distance themselves from him at all. He had a company that was existing way before and after the Piarco airport project.”
Rambachan could not provide details of the tendering process and directed questions to Food Production Minister Devant Maharaj.
Contacted on his cellphone yesterday, Maharaj said he also disagreed with the notion that Galbaransingh should be sidelined because of the allegations.
He added: “As far as I am aware his company tendered like everybody else. Whatever tender rules existed he emerged as the successful bidder.
“Why should we distance ourselves? Is it that he is not allowed to do business in Trinidad? Should we terminate any projects for which he has won a bid?
“What is the basis of the discrimination against him. If we do this we can open up ourselves to litigation?” Maharaj asked.
He also denied knowledge of the tendering process, saying it was handled by the National Agricultural Marketing and Development Corporation (Namdevco).
“The details of implementation and execution was done by Namdevco. I didn’t even know Galbaransingh’s company was doing this project,” Maharaj said.
He directed questions to Namdevco’s CEO Ganesh Gangapersad, who assured that Aztec Pavers won the contract because it had the lowest bid.
He said he was out of office and could not provide details of the tenders but would do so when he got in office today.
Flex:
Judge blanks Ish and Steve.
By Jada Loutoo (Newsday).
ONLY 14 of the 53 cases left unfinished by former chief magistrate Marcia Ayers-Caesar when she took up a position as a judge in April, last year, are left to be determined.
Justice Carol Gobin provided the update in a recent decision in which she dismissed an application by businessmen Steve Ferguson, Ishwar Galbaransingh, Brian Kuei Tung and others to join the State’s interpretation lawsuit over the short-lived judicial appointment of Ayers-Caesar.
The three businessmen, as well as Peter Cateau and Tyrone Gopee, all of whom are facing fraud charges out of the construction of the Piarco International Airport, filed the application because the magistrate hearing their case retired earlier this year leaving their preliminary inquiry incomplete.
In her decision, Gobin said to grant the applications to intervene “will inevitably result in further delay in determination of the interpretation summons which was filed just over one year ago. “This consequence is undesirable and unjustifiable,” she said.
According to Gobin, she has been cognisant of the need for the interpretation summons to be dealt with expedition “because of the understandable and undeniable claims of the several accused persons, whose part heard trials were affected by the elevation of the chief magistrate to the bench, of extreme hardship, unfairness and prejudice.”
“ I have not been insensitive to the feelings of the families of victims and other affected persons,” she said.
According to her, the Director of Public Prosecution said that of the 53 matters left unfinished, only 14 are now left to be determined.
“Given the public importance of the matter, an early resolution may go some way to restoring some measure of public confidence in the system. An outcome which gives rise to the possibility of further embarrassment to the system has to be avoided.”
She also said she was not persuaded by the arguments put forward by the Piarco accused for their reasons to intervene, saying their claim had no place in the AG’s summons before her and would add complexity to the narrow case left for her to determine.
Gobin also said she considered the prejudice to be suffered by other accused whose cases were affected by the elevation of the former chief magistrate since one of them had to be adjourned while the preliminary issue of the joinder application had to be determined.
“So far the decision in the connected matter has already been adjourned on two occasions.
The delay has been unavoidable but nonetheless embarrassing and a matter of regret. It is
not fair to the parties in the connected matter to have further postponements of that judgment to a more distant date.”
With the applications of the Piarco accused having been refused, Gobin directed that submissions be filed on the interpretation summons before December 12.
She has promised to make every effort to determine the matter before the end of the year.
In the interpretation lawsuit, the AG is seeking to determine Ayers-Caesar’s status of a magistrate when she took up a judicial appointment in April last year. She resigned after two weeks amid public furore over the 53 cases she left unfinished, when she accepted the position. The case is also seeking to determine if Ayers-Caesar could have been allowed to return to complete the cases or what measures could have been taken to resolve the issue.
Some of the accused persons directly affected have agreed to have their cases restarted by Ayers-Caesar’s successor Maria Busby-Earle-Caddle, and have since been completed.
Flex:
Pandays walk as DPP discontinues Piarco 3 corruption case
By Derek Achong (T&T Guardian).
After spending almost two decades before the courts, former prime minister Basdeo Panday, his wife Oma, former Cabinet minister Carlos John and businessman Ishwar Galbaransingh have been freed of corruption charges related to the construction of the Piarco International Airport.
Appearing before Magistrate Adia Mohammed in the Port-of-Spain Magistrates’ Court yesterday morning, Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Roger Gaspard, SC, announced his decision to use his constitutional discretion to discontinue the charges against the group.
Gaspard explained that his decision was based on the low probability of his office securing convictions in the case.
He explained that several key witnesses had died since the group was charged in 2006 and one main witness is now elderly and lives abroad. He also noted that the accused had a “fair argument” that they faced “presumed, presumptive and specific” prejudice in the case.
The case against the group was one of four related to the airport project initiated following an investigation by Canadian forensic expert Robert Lindquist.
In the first case, commonly referred to as Piarco 1, a group of government officials and businesspeople was charged with offences related to the alleged theft of $19 million.
The group included Galbaransingh, former finance minister Brian Kuei Tung; former national security minister Russell Huggins; former Nipdec chairman Edward Bayley (now deceased); Maritime General executives John Smith (now deceased), Steve Ferguson, and Barbara Gomes; Northern Construction Financial director Amrith Maharaj; and Kuei Tung’s then-companion Renee Pierre.
Some of the group and other public officials were also slapped with separate charges over an alleged broader conspiracy in another case, commonly referred to as Piarco 2.
The Piarco 3 case pertained to a £25,000 bribe allegedly received by Panday and his wife, and allegedly paid by John and Galbaransingh, as an alleged inducement in relation to the airport project. The Piarco 4 case only involves Pierre.
In 2019, a High Court Judge upheld a legal challenge over the Piarco 2 case after former senior magistrate Ejenny Espinet retired with the preliminary inquiry almost complete. The ruling meant the preliminary inquiry into the Piarco 2 case had to be restarted before a new magistrate, along with the Piarco 3 inquiry, which was also before Espinet and left incomplete upon her retirement.
The Piarco 4 is also yet to be completed.
In June last year, the United Kingdom-based Privy Council upheld an appeal from some of the accused in the Piarco 1 case, over the decision of former chief magistrate Sherman McNicolls to commit them to stand trial for the charges.
The Privy Council ruled that McNicolls should have upheld their application for him to recuse himself from the case, as he was “hopelessly compromised” based on a then-pending land deal with Clico and the involvement of former attorney general John Jeremie, SC, in helping him resolve it.
The Privy Council said: “Given that everything was happening in the full flare of publicity his mind must have been in turmoil. It is not difficult to imagine his gratitude. He has the Attorney General to thank for resolving his serious financial problems and for shutting down an investigation into his reprehensible conduct.”
Following the outcome of the case, DPP Gaspard issued a press release in which he noted the inquiry had to be either restarted or the accused persons had to agree that indictments against them could be filed in the High Court without going through the PI process.
Gaspard noted that he would only make a decision on whether it should be restarted after considering public interest factors, including the age of the case, costs incurred by the State thus far, and the need to demonstrate the State’s commitment to prosecuting alleged acts of fraud on the citizenry. He also suggested a joint trial of all the allegations arising out of the four Piarco cases would be desirable.
“It has been my public position that taking Piarco 1 to trial would have been oppressive if not legally nettlesome while the other matters related to the airport project were in train, bearing in mind that there were common accused in both sets of matters,” Gaspard had said.
When Piarco 3 came up before Magistrate Mohammed last year, lawyers representing the group sought to stop its restart, as they claimed it would be oppressive due to “inexcusable and inordinate” delays by the State in prosecuting it.
The Pandays were represented by Justin Phelps and Chase Pegus, while Sophia Chote, SC, and Samantha Ramsaran represented John. Galbaransingh was represented by Rajiv Persad.
Magistrate Mohammed eventually dismissed the application for a stay of the proceedings in September last year.
Magistrate Mohammed said: “I am therefore satisfied on a balance of probabilities that the delay complained of has not resulted in prejudice to the applicants such that it may be contended that they cannot receive a fair trial.”
She added, “I am also satisfied on a balance of probabilities that the continued prosecution of the applicants is not unconscionable, oppressive, and a misuse of the process of the court.”
In November last year, British King’s Counsel Edward Fitzgerald wrote to Gaspard on behalf of most of the accused in the other three Piarco cases and called for a similar stay. Fitzgerald put forward six main grounds why he and his colleagues felt that Gaspard should exercise his discretion under Section 90(3)(c) of the Constitution to take the bold move.
“Where the interests of justice and the public interest can only be met by discontinuing the Piarco proceedings, the DPP not only has the power to take that step but an obligation to do so in his role as an impartial ‘minister of justice’,” Fitzgerald said.
Fitzgerald’s main ground of contention was that the move was necessary to protect the moral integrity of the criminal justice system, based on serious allegations of political interference in the investigation that led to the charges against his clients.
Fitzgerald further claimed his clients’ right to a fair trial without undue delay was breached, as the four cases have been pending for almost two decades. He also referred to Jeremie’s involvement in the cases, including his then role as head of the Anti-Corruption Investigations Bureau (ACIB), which investigated and laid the charges in the cases.
Gaspard is yet to announce his decisions on the other cases but is expected to do so when they come up for hearing later this year.
Last April, there was public concern after Florida Circuit Court Judge Reemberto Diaz disqualified Attorney General Reginald Armour, SC, and the country’s US lawyers, Sequor Law, from representing T&T in a multi-million civil asset forfeiture case against some of the accused persons and companies in the Piarco cases.
The decision was based on Armour allegedly downplaying his role in representing Kuei Tung in the local proceedings several years ago.
Armour has denied any wrongdoing, as he claimed he informed the court of his role based on his memory while on an overseas trip. He also contended he was denied an opportunity to correct the record after he had an opportunity to check the information.
Although former attorney general Faris Al-Rawi was appointed as the substitute client representative for this country, the decision was appealed.
Delivering a decision early last month, three judges of Florida’s Third Appellate Court upheld their colleague’s decision.
Al-Rawi is currently in the US representing T&T in that civil matter.
Flex:
Ish Galbaransingh has passed away