Section 34 Thread

[Football supporter]

Just heard the press release from Roger Gaspard. It lays out all of the key dates in the process that brought into law the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act 2011.

It is either very coincidental or an extreme lack of professionalism on the part of the government that this act became law when it did. The act received assent awaiting proclomation on 16th December 2011  and the Attorney General ruled againt appealing the refusal of extradition of those involved in Piarco 1 & 2 on 19th December 2011.

Now, surely if you are the A.G., you would be intimately aware of all consequences of such an act, particularly Section 34? Therefore, if you intend to rule on a case 3 days later, it is clear that the implications of that ruling in relation to section 34 would be known.

To add to the concern over Section 34, the Prime Minister, being herself a lawyer, and a silk at that, would be expected to be fully aware of the connotations of Section 34 and the implications regarding the decision not to appeal the Piarco decision.

Worse still, the DPP only became aware that this act came into law by reading about it in the papers! He was under the belief that the only way the act was to be approved was if certain provisions were added. That too was the belief of the opposition, who's support was required to get the bill passed into law.

So, the nations safeguards, the opposition and the DPP, were bypassed in order to enact this law.

Whether or not there were outside influences in this matter, while being a concern, the first issue is how can the government pass into law a bill that has not followed the correct process?

No one else can be blamed other than the Prime Minister. The only way she can save herself is to deflect attention onto the A.G. and his decision not to appeal the extradition decision. Even then, the fact remains that this government did not follow due process and circumvented the checks and balances put in place to protect the citizens from unjust laws.

[warmonga]

ley all a dem hush dey ass "Kamla is Boss" mi eh hear dey want she to resign for not pursuing manning and his personal temple he buuilt with state funds... Kamla is boss ley dey tek dat and cool it..
war

[truetrini]

ley all a dem hush dey ass "Kamla is Boss" mi eh hear dey want she to resign for not pursuing manning and his personal temple he buuilt with state funds... Kamla is boss ley dey tek dat and cool it..
war

I see that you playing STUPID again and yuh winning.

[Jah Gol]

ley all a dem hush dey ass "Kamla is Boss" mi eh hear dey want she to resign for not pursuing manning and his personal temple he buuilt with state funds... Kamla is boss ley dey tek dat and cool it..
war

[Die_Hard]

Nothing but the Truth... (Section 34 Cont'd)

Very rarely do we get such a clear view behind the scenes at the inner workings of party politics when in government, but it seems that what many have been referring to as curry duck and scotch politics may have have erupted prematurely over bubbly beverages in Tobago where it hit a snag.

Make no mistake, this whole Section 34 fiasco was not just a cluster-screw-up of epic proportions nor 'novel-esque' fiction brought to life, but a real tale of seedy conspiracy involving men of ill repute who, besides having multiples of matters before local courts for bid rigging and corruption are also wanted internationally to answer questions relating to money laundering and connections with at least one of the biggest drug cartels in the world.

How this comes to be associated with Ministers of government and an alleged attempt to pervert the course of justice using the nation's legislature and some of the highest Offices in the land is destined to make for some gripping reading and I daresay we are in for quite a ride before we get to the back of this book.

Listening to the Chief Justice in his address at the ceremonial opening of the new law term debunk the notion that the Act in question was either intended to or was functionally capable of being proclaimed and implemented piece-meal or before time saw every obstructionist misdirecting defense put forward by all of the government's hired guns fall flat and one is left wondering, who is attending to this damage control?

Did the Sports Minister for example know that much of what he was saying at that time was a lie? Does he know that now?

To hear the remonstrations of His Excellency the President of the Republic in his address at the same event one is tempted to ask 'M'lud, did you not think to summon these same fortitudes when beseeched to act on Independence Day?'

Caught in arguably the most ignoble of pursuits and instead of simply coming straight with the people they swore to serve impartially and fair, the AG and crew seem to have opted instead for accelerating out of the skid by adding arrogance and bluster to the already swirling mass of conjecture that has many of the citizens of this country spitting mad.

Thinking us jackasses the way dumb farm animals are jackasses, the Attorney General straddled the nation's Parliament on Wednesday and went off on a righteous misdirecting tirade seemingly bent on putting the whole Section 34 matter if not at the feet of the opposition then at least on the entire Parliament itself in an attempt to make the matter go away, but by the time he and the other equally animated contributors from that side were finished, not only did they fail miserably so to do, they may very well have succeeded at making the entire matter that much worse.

Who are the 'high' people that made the decision to proclaim the section as alluded to by the Sports Minister?

The worst flogging has to be reserved for the Minster of Justice though, who it appears seems to have put his brain in a blind trust when he left the bench to take up public office.

Did he really expect to throw a cat among the pigeons and that things would proceed quietly? Why aren't his stories adding up?

Who else was in the loop? Was the Prime Minister involved? What exactly did she know and when? The irony in all of this is that the same people who were treated with such scant  respect may have the final say, and I daresay should not contemplate judgement or attach consequence until we have learned the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Now that everyone of note has weighed in on the issue it appears that the only thing that we know with absolute clarity and certainty beyond a shadow of a doubt at this point in time is that the people of this country are held in the highest contempt by at least the Attorney General and the Minister of Justice if not the entire United National Congress and their co-conspirators in government.


Posted by Phillip Edward Alexander at 8:07 AM

[Football supporter]

Excellent appraisal of the situation.

The voters should note the key players in this, and it's not just those immediately culpable. Anil Roberts and Jack Warner both stood in defence of this malpractice and did their best to shift the focus back to the PNM. This device is getting to be so tiresome. It happened. Get over it. Two hundred wrongs don't make one right. Their lack of apology, both in the parliament and after the event should illuminate the electorate.

And it was amazing how the Prime Minister could be so vocal through the debate, without having the gumption to take to her feet, and yet be so silent now the magnitude of the storm is upon her. A leader must accept responsibility and take action against those who have misled her cabinet and made them look both foolish and indictable. It's either one or two bad apples, or the whole cabinet. Whichever, someone or everyone must go. But worse, to see a significant number of the population take to the streets, albeit stirred by the opposition, should warrant a response from the PM.

The tactic of pretending things haven't happened cannot prevail forever.

[Socapro]

http://www.newsday.co.tt/news/0,166414.html

‘Breach of trust’
By Lara Pickford-Gordon Wednesday, September 19 2012

The People’s National Movement (PNM) has asked President George Maxwell Richards to get an explanation from Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar for the decision by the Cabinet to have Section 34 of the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act 2011 proclaimed early, on August 31.

The PNM said this was “a breach of the trust of the Parliament,” and also called for the appointments of Minister of Justice Herbert Volney and Attorney General Anand Ramlogan to be immediately revoked to avoid further “national distress and international opprobrium on this matter.”

The PNM is also asking the President, in his constitutionally required consultations with the Prime Minister, to raise as a matter of urgency the national community’s outrage.

These requests were contained in a petition of signatures which was delivered to Acting President Timothy Hamel-Smith at President’s House, St Ann’s, at about 3 pm yesterday after a march from Woodford Square, Port-of-Spain.

President Richards left the country yesterday morning for New Zealand where he will deliver the Plenary Address at the Chemeca 2012 conference of the Australian and New Zealand Community of Chemical Engineers and Industrial Chemists which takes place from September 23 to 26. Richards was accompanied by his wife Dr Jean Ramjohn-Richards and will proceed on vacation after the conference.

There was a large turnout for the PNM’s march with scores of persons wearing red jerseys and carrying national flags. Chief Secretary of the PNM-controlled Tobago House of Assembly Orville London travelled to Trinidad to be part of the march. Not all were supporters of PNM and many persons were present to register their dissatisfaction with Government including Movement for Social Justice leader David Abdulah, political analyst Dr Kirk Meighoo and Robert Mayers of the Congress of the People (COP).

Addressing the gathering at the Queen’s Park Savannah (QPS), just after 4 pm, after spending close to an hour meeting with Hamel-Smith, Opposition and PNM Leader Dr Keith Rowley said 25,000 signatures were collected within the 48 hours that the march was announced.

He announced that the President was asked to trace the documents related to Section 34 “backwards to its origin” to make sure rules and regulations were followed for every stage of proceedings right to the drafting of the Cabinet note. Rowley asked for the President to report to the country on his findings.

Rowley suggested that TT’s international image had been “stained” by the Section 34 controversy.

He said, “Understanding this is the communication age, in a matter of seconds, around the world from Australia to Timbuktu from New Zealand to Scotland, the people know that in TT there exists a Government that betrayed the Parliament, that used the Cabinet to allow alleged criminals innocent or guilty to not have their day in court.”

Rowley wrote to the United States, Canadian, United Kingdom, French and Dutch governments as well as the Organisation of American States and Association of Caribbean States and Caricom advising that “even though the Government has done that to the people, the people will have none of this.”

He criticised the silence from members of Cabinet in not giving explanations of the action taken. Rowley observed that Persad-Bissessar was in the Parliament for the amendment to repeal Section 34, last Wednesday, but also “did not have a word to say. All she did was try and get Anil Roberts to speak.”

COP leader and head of the Legislative Review Committee (LRC) Prakash Ramadhar’s silence for two weeks was also criticised.

Rowley was not impressed by Ramadhar’s apology at a press conference yesterday and cited the statement that the LRC was not consulted.

[Socapro]

Hundreds fill the streets in March against Government
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/e_tsmWx24Fg" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/e_tsmWx24Fg</a>

[Socapro]

http://www.newsday.co.tt/news/0,166411.html

'I HUMBLY APOLOGISE'
By Andre Bagoo Wednesday, September 19 2012

CONGRESS of the People (COP) political leader Prakash Ramadhar yesterday apologised for any part he may have played in the “awful fiasco” of the Section 34 scandal, breaking ranks from coalition partners UNC and TOP on the issue.

Ramadhar, the Legal Affairs Minister, and San Fernando West MP Carolyn Seepersad-Bachan, the Public Administration Minister, both issued apologies at a press conference called at the COP’s Flagship House at Broome Street, Port-of-Spain.

Ramadhar said, “Personally I want to apologise to this nation for any part I took to have contributed to this fiasco but things are done in an environment of trust and sometimes that trust may not necessarily have been well-founded.”

At another point, he appeared to apologise a second time, saying he had been assured by unnamed Government officials that the law would not come into effect until years passed.

He said, “I want to take responsibility as far as, personally, I can and to apologise. Really on reflection there was an awful thing (that took place) but I did raise the issue and on the basis that the coming into force of the Act would not have come (until) an extended period (lapsed) we voted on it, all of us. But I am not trying to absolve myself.”

Seepersad-Bachan said, “We apologise for what has happened.”

Ramadhar said he has requested a meeting with Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar on the issue within the next 48 hours.

Thus far, the only other MP to apologise for the fiasco is Independent Senator Helen Drayton. The UNC and COP member Anil Roberts declined to apologise in Parliament debates last week.

The apologies came less than a week after the House of Representatives and Senate passed legislation to repeal Section 34 retroactively in an attempt to contain the legal fallout from its early proclamation-approved by Cabinet-on August 31. That early proclamation opened the door to two persons linked to the UNC possibly being discharged and given “not guilty” verdicts by a judge.

The old version of Section 34 introduced a statutory limit (seven to ten years) on criminal prosecutions dating from the start of proceedings, while the inserted version started time at the date of the crime. The new version of the section was tabled by Minister of Justice Herbert Volney in the Senate on November 29, 2011 after the House of Representatives approved the original version on November 18, 2011.

Ramadhar said the controversial “new” version of Section 34 was never placed before the Cabinet sub-committee on legal matters – the Legislative Review Committee, which he chairs.

However, he admitted that after the section was inserted into the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act in the Senate on November 29, 2011, he became aware of it, observing that the section was “fundamentally different.”

He raised concerns and was assured that the legislation would not be proclaimed, thus allowing the passage of time in which indictments of pending matters could be brought.

He did not name the specific ministers who gave him assurances. But asked if he could trust and work with Volney and Attorney General Anand Ramlogan, Ramadhar said, “We will have to wait and see how that goes.”

At the same time, Ramadhar and Seepersad-Bachan suggested that the COP MPs did not appreciate the impact the section would have on specific cases. “Many did not appreciate the true gravity of this,” she said. She said without consultation on legislation, its true impact is hard to foresee.

Ramadhar said the Cabinet deliberated on a note brought by Volney in relation to the law to implement the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act last month, on August 9. It was this note that contained the controversial early proclamation of Section 34.

However, Ramadhar, when pressed by reporters, refused to detail Cabinet’s thought process in approving Volney’s note which recommended the proclamation of Section 34 on August 31.

“I will not be able to answer without breaching Cabinet responsibility,” he said.

Asked if the coalition has been damaged by the scandal, Ramadhar said, “I think all of Trinidad and Tobago has been damaged by this fiasco.” At the same time he criticised the Opposition PNM for yesterday staging a march on the issue, stating it was not in the best interest of the country.

“I wonder what benefit to the nation comes from that,” Ramadhar said.

[Football supporter]

Warner said there were only 3,000 people on the march and this was ascertained from aerial photos. The police said between 12,000 - 15,000. It's come to something when you feel inclined to believe the police.

[Socapro]

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/news/PM_BREAKS_SILENCE-170446696.html

PM BREAKS SILENCE
Section 34 Fiasco Kamala: I chose to remain silent on the issue...because a premature commentary on the matter before all information became available to me would have been injudicious
By Anna Ramdassanna.ramdass@trinidadexpress.com
Story Created: Sep 20, 2012 at 12:01 AM ECT

Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar will finally be breaking her silence today after almost two weeks of public outrage over the early proclamation of Section 34 of the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act.
 
Persad-Bissessar yesterday walked around Laventille and environs where she met and encouraged residents to keep the peace.
 
Almost three hours later after the walk, when pressed by the media on the Section 34 issue, Persad-Bissessar responded: "I will be making a statement tomorrow after Cabinet."
 
Later, a release was issued by the Office of the Prime Minister stating that the Prime Minister will be issuing a full statement on the matter today after Cabinet is concluded.
 
The Prime Minister stated in the release:

"Soon after Section 34 was proclaimed, the Director of Public Prosecutions expressed concerns to the Attorney General regarding the implications and consequences of the event. The Attorney General sought an immediate audience with me and, having examined the matter myself, I was satisfied that the consequences and far-reaching implications of this section were not consistent with Government policy.
 
"In the circumstances, I gave instructions for the Parliament to be convened immediately to consider a Bill to repeal Section 34. I also summoned the Cabinet to an emergency meeting to discuss the matter. The Government therefore moved swiftly to successfully reverse the ill-effects and unintended consequences of this section.
 
"Apart from taking immediate and necessary action to repeal Section 34, I chose to remain silent on the issue of its early proclamation because a premature commentary on the matter before all information became available to me would have been injudicious. Since then I have been personally enquiring into the circumstances that created the situation before us today and will be issuing a full statement on the matter tomorrow, Thursday, September 20 after Cabinet is concluded."
 
Section 34 of the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act, 2011 was proclaimed by the President on August 30, thereby giving accused persons a legal avenue to apply to a judge to throw out a case if more than ten years had passed since the commission of the alleged offence and if the trial had not yet started.
 
On the heels of the proclamation, businessmen Ishwar Galbaransingh and Steve Ferguson, as well as other accused, applied to the High Court under Section 34 for their freedom.
 
The UNC financiers are accused of bid-rigging and conspiracy to defraud the Government of Trinidad and Tobago during the period March 1, 1997 to December 21, 2000, in the construction of the Piarco International Airport Terminal.
 
Last Tuesday the Prime Minister held an emergency Cabinet meeting and instructed that Parliament be reconvened to repeal Section 34.
 
On Wednesday and Thursday, the House of Representatives and Senate met respectively and Section 34 was repealed.
 
Early last Friday morning, the President signed the Proclamation Order repealing Section 34 which he had proclaimed just two weeks ago on August 30.
 
The furore continued, however, with Opposition Leader Dr Keith Rowley calling on citizens to march against the Government's handling of Section 34.
 
The Opposition argued that it had supported the Act because assurances were given that it would not be proclaimed until the legal infrastructure was put into place.
 
On Tuesday, Rowley led a march from the Red House to President's House where he presented a petition bearing 25,000 signatures to acting President Timothy Hamel-Smith which called on the Prime Minister to explain the section 34 fiasco and also revoke the appointments of Attorney General Anand Ramlogan and Justice Minister Herbert Volney.
 
On the same day that Rowley and thousands marched, Congress of the People (COP) political leader Prakash Ramadhar publicly apologised for his part in the Section 34 fiasco.
 
Ramadhar urged his own Government of which he is a partner, to come forward and explain the details that led to the passing of the contentious section.
 
Not only did the DPP take issue with the proclamation of Section 34 but the Criminal Bar Association and Law Association also stated that they were not consulted on this particular section.
 
Chief Justice Ivor Archie also spoke out on the issue at the opening of the 2012/13 law term, saying the implementation of any legislative policy to eliminate preliminary enquiries could not realistically have taken place before the first quarter of 2013.
 
Today, the country will hear from the Prime Minister herself why her Cabinet took the decision to proclaim Section 34 and whether anyone will be held accountable.

[Brownsugar]

hhhhhmmmm this is a tough one.....who to believe??......de police or de fella who has an economy with the truth??.....how ah solving this one boy??.....

[weary1969]

So what time HRH KPB speakin?

[E-man]

hhhhhmmmm this is a tough one.....who to believe??......de police or de fella who has an economy with the truth??.....how ah solving this one boy??.....

Warner's really good a counting tickets so I'm going with him.

[weary1969]

hhhhhmmmm this is a tough one.....who to believe??......de police or de fella who has an economy with the truth??.....how ah solving this one boy??.....

Warner's really good a counting tickets so I'm going with him.

 

[ZANDOLIE]

Volney gone, Anand the teflon man survives another day

[rotatopoti3]

Policy of Truth

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hp3JgWmQHcE&feature=related

[Tallman]

[D.H.W]

 

[Bakes]

I dunno how this woman could premise the firing of Volney on his "failure to advise Parliament"... but leave Anand untouched, when as AG his role is to advise the Government on legal action/ramifications.  I want to see if the populace in TnT, particularly the legal and journalistic fraternities go let this one slide.  People deride Romney and say all kinda thing about the march... the march didn't have to be no tidal wave, just another drop in the bucket, another note in a steady drumbeat to get Kamla feet moving.

[lefty]

snake boy goes and goat buller stays nonsense anand wasn't legal counsel for Ish at ah point.......she for real.......steups........coco in d sun, have to be dat members of she gov't have she under manners...nah

[pardners]

Excellent appraisal of the situation.

The voters should note the key players in this, and it's not just those immediately culpable. Anil Roberts and Jack Warner both stood in defence of this malpractice and did their best to shift the focus back to the PNM. This device is getting to be so tiresome. It happened. Get over it. Two hundred wrongs don't make one right. Their lack of apology, both in the parliament and after the event should illuminate the electorate.

And it was amazing how the Prime Minister could be so vocal through the debate, without having the gumption to take to her feet, and yet be so silent now the magnitude of the storm is upon her. A leader must accept responsibility and take action against those who have misled her cabinet and made them look both foolish and indictable. It's either one or two bad apples, or the whole cabinet. Whichever, someone or everyone must go. But worse, to see a significant number of the population take to the streets, albeit stirred by the opposition, should warrant a response from the PM.

The tactic of pretending things haven't happened cannot prevail forever.

Well I guess the concern was addressed.
I for one REALLLLLLYYYYY glad they buss Volney's throat....too stupid and arrogant.

[weary1969]

Excellent appraisal of the situation.

The voters should note the key players in this, and it's not just those immediately culpable. Anil Roberts and Jack Warner both stood in defence of this malpractice and did their best to shift the focus back to the PNM. This device is getting to be so tiresome. It happened. Get over it. Two hundred wrongs don't make one right. Their lack of apology, both in the parliament and after the event should illuminate the electorate.

And it was amazing how the Prime Minister could be so vocal through the debate, without having the gumption to take to her feet, and yet be so silent now the magnitude of the storm is upon her. A leader must accept responsibility and take action against those who have misled her cabinet and made them look both foolish and indictable. It's either one or two bad apples, or the whole cabinet. Whichever, someone or everyone must go. But worse, to see a significant number of the population take to the streets, albeit stirred by the opposition, should warrant a response from the PM.

The tactic of pretending things haven't happened cannot prevail forever.

Well I guess the concern was addressed.
I for one REALLLLLLYYYYY glad they buss Volney's throat....too stupid and arrogant.

ENTTTTTTTTTTTT take yuh snake and go

[Brownsugar]

At least Anand have to go too as well.  If not, then Kams need to resign and call fresh elections....

[D.H.W]

At least Anand have to go too as well.  If not, then Kams need to resign and call fresh elections....

Doh hold yuh breath and wait for that

[Bitter]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/zVbzIdDaIN0" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/zVbzIdDaIN0</a>

[truetrini]

SECTION   34   TIMELINE
(some parts have been copied and pasted from the online news becaue I am not a legal luminary and don't want to make incorrect edits)
_________________________
1995-2001: Steve Ferguson and Ishwar Galbaransingh allegedly defraud the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago of over $1 billion in relation to construction contracts in the new Piarco Airport Project.
 
March 2011: Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) senior counsel Roger Gaspard consulted about theAdministration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act 2011 . DPP not asked comment on the significance of section 34(2) and 34(3). At this time section 34 or Schedule 6 as now contained in the Act  were not in the draft bill sent by the Minister of Justice.
 
6th May 2011: Director of Public Prosecutions senior counsel Roger Gaspard comments on the act
 
7th Nov 2011: Justice Ronnie Boodoosingh's decision to quash the extradition of Steve Fergusson and Ishwar Galbaransingh on corruption charges. (This simple means that the court deems thhat TT is the best place to try both men)  THE BILL IS LAID 4 DAYS LATER.
 
11th November 2011: the Bill is introduced into the Parliament of Trinidad and Tobago
 
29th November 2011: Clause 34 is changed on a motion in the Senate by the Hon. Minister of Justice. The effect of that change was to prevent the prosecution of offences not covered by Schedule 6 where the conduct alleged occurred more than ten (10) years ago. (Schedule 6 excludes white-collar crimes such as sedition, terrorism, piracy, money laundering or offences under the Larceny and Forgery Acts). This has serious international implications. Steve Ferguson and Ishwar Galbaransingh COULD HAVE CHARGES DROPPED AGAINST THEM UNDER SECTION 34 SINCE THE TEN YEAR PERIOD HAS PASSED.
 
DPP is not consulted about this change to clause 34 of the Bill.
 
The implications of Section 34 appear to have slipped past Parliamentarians.
 
16th December 2011: received the assent of the President on the 16th of December 2011. Instructively, on the 19th of December 2011 the Attorney General announced his decision not to appeal the judgment of the Hon. Mr. Justice Boodoosingh, that the decision to return Ishwar Galbaransingh and Steve Ferguson to the United States of America, was unjust and oppressive. Doubtless, when he announced that decision, the Attorney General must have had in mind the provisions of section 34.
 
24th July, 2012: DPP attends a meeting held by the Judiciary and Justice Sector Committee at the Chief Justice’s Conference Room at the Hall of Justice on One of the items on the agenda was the Implementation Process for the Regime under the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act 2011.The effect and import of section 34 of the Act are raised. This Minister of Justice declares that Cabinet had already made a decision.
 
31st August 2012: Section 34 of the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act 2011 comes into effect.
 
Under this act section 34(2) and 34(3) are of such effect that any matter involving offences committed over ten (10) years ago cannot now be tried unless they are excepted by Schedule 6 of the Act. However, Schedule 6 does not apply to the captioned matters. REMEMBER: (Schedule 6 excludes white-collar crimes such as sedition, terrorism, piracy, money laundering or offences under the Larceny and Forgery Acts). Section 34 allows those charged under the act to apply for the charges to be dropped if they allegedly committed offences more than ten years previously.
 
 
 
10th September 2012: Businessmen Ish Galbaransingh and Steve Ferguson file applications on Monday to be freed of charges relating to corruption charges in the Piarco Airport project.
 
Section 34 is not yet repealed.
 
DPP write AG Anand Ramlogan on the matter
 
 
11th September 2012: DPP learning of the proclamation Section 34 in the press, writes Attorney General Anand Ramlogan suggesting that the Act be repealed immediately with retroactive effect.
AG cites reasons not to repeal section 34
 
 
12th September 2012: Businessmen Ish Galbaransingh and Steve Ferguson can be freed of corruption charges says Dana Seetahal since the application was filed (to drop all charges against them) while section 34 was in force and they are entitled to the benefit of the act.
 
Seetahal states that when repealing the section 34, there should be provision so that the law has retroactive effect to a specific date ( so the offenders have no room for litigation)
AG declares section 34 be removed;  it cannot stand on its own “ without absurdity”
DPP declares that the original clause he saw has been changed.
DPP states that the original document he viewed did not indicate a date range when offences were committed as a basis for discharge
DPP declares no parallel to Sections (20 and (3) in the entire Commonwealth
Parliament convenes for the purpose of repealing the Act.
 
SOURCES
http://www.guardian.co.tt/news/2012-09-12/ish-steve-can-still-go-free%E2%80%94seetahal
http://www.trinidadexpress.com/news/Breaking-News---Gaspard-Breaks-Silence-169487316.html


Thing is Anand Ramlogan and Kamla lying no arse...4 days after refusing to appeal Boodoosingh's decision not to extradite  Anand and dem laid the act!

steups wussesss government EVER in T&T

[Flex]

Thousands 'vote' to remove AG, Jack during Section 34 march
By Joel Julien (Express).

THE AYES HAVE IT

THOUSANDS of citizens yesterday took to the streets of the capital city, calling for Attorney General Anand Ramlogan and National Security Minister Jack Warner to hit the road.

The march, which began at Woodford Square, Port of Spain, around 1.20 p.m. yesterday, lasted just over two hours and ended with a public meeting on the Brian Lara Promenade.

At the promenade, a vote was held parliamentary-style where the crowd was asked whether Warner and Ramlogan should be fired.

The "ayes" had it.

A senior police officer at the march estimated the crowd to be around 25,000.

Several leaders who addressed the public meeting after the march estimated the crowd to be as much as 40,000.

Warner would however say the size of the crowd was 500, Ancel Roget, president general of the Oilfields Workers' Trade Union (OWTU), said yesterday.

At noon yesterday, a coalition of political parties, among them the People's National Movement (PNM), led by Dr Keith Rowley; Movement for Social Justice (MSJ), led by David Abdulah; and the Democratic National Assembly (DNA), led by Dr Kirk Meighoo, trade unions and civic groups gathered at Woodford Square, calling for Ramlogan and Warner to be fired.

When the march reached in front of the Attorney General's office at Cabildo Chambers on St Vincent Street, the crowd stopped.

"Anand have to go right now!" they chanted as armed officers of the Guard and Emergency Branch blocked the entrance.

During the march, Warner was labelled as a "runaway horse".

The march took place under surveillance of a National Security Ministry helicopter which flew overhead.

Members of the Guard and Emergency Branch, known as the riot squad, Mounted Branch officers and other uniformed and plain-clothes police were also present.

Three photographers and two cameramen from the police, who were in plain clothes, also took footage of the march.

The march was a continuation of the PNM's initial mobilisation last month against the Section 34 fiasco.

On September 18, Rowley led a march to the President's House to deliver a letter to demand a written explanation from Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar as to why the controversial Section 34 was prematurely selected to become law.

Meighoo estimated that "this march was much larger than the last one".

"I have served in the Parliament for 20-odd years. In this country, we had PNM governments, we had a NAR (National Alliance for Reconstruction) government, we had a UNC (United National Congress) government under Basdeo Panday, and we had differences with those governments; nobody more than the unions on this (head) table," Rowley said.

"They had issues with the government, but every occasion, it was a difference of opinion over policies and programmes, and that is okay," he said.

"But what has happened under the Kamla Persad-Bissessar Government never happened under any other government," Rowley said, in reference to the Section 34 debacle.

"You walked today because you saw a threat to democracy and an abuse by office-holders. For the first time, and the only time known to me, a Cabinet decided to use its authority of Cabinet to undermine the rule of law in the country to create a loophole for financiers of the party to get away," Rowley said, referring to Ish Galbaransingh and Steve Ferguson.

Abdulah was the last of the leaders to address the meeting.

Abdulah said although a motion of censure against Ramlogan was defeated in the Lower House, he wanted to conduct a similar vote on the promenade.

"Is Anand Ramlogan culpable in the Section 34 fiasco? All those in favour, say 'aye' ," Abdulah said.

"Aye!" the crowd said in response.

"All those against?" Abdulah said.

There was no response.

"The ayes have it," he said to loud applause.

Abdulah then conducted a similar vote for Warner, who he said has abused his power as National Security minister.

"So I put it to you now; notice of censure to remove Jack Warner as minister of National Security for his abuse of executive power. All those in favour, say 'aye'."

"Aye!" the crowd responded.

"Any against?" Abdulah said.

"No!" the crowd said.

"They ayes have it," Abdulah said.

Roget called on citizens to prepare themselves for the next move if Ramlogan and Warner are not fired.

Roget said the country may have to be shut down in order to save it.

Former attorney general Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj said the entire Cabinet is guilty in relation to the Section 34 fiasco.

Lawrence Maharaj said when the People's Partnership won elections, he was interviewed by Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar for the office of attorney general.

Lawrence Maharaj said Persad-Bissessar asked him if he would raise alarms if issues of corruption were present in the Government.

Ramlogan was named Attorney General.

Ramesh said several Cabinet members have become millionaires and billionaires since entering the Government.

"Our country is in crisis; they have brought our country to its knees. They have, in effect, made us try to forget our moral values," he said.

"Some of them, in the short space of time, I would not call names today, but some of them, they remain nameless for the time being, some of them are millionaires already, some are even billionaires," Lawrence Maharaj said.

Lawrence Maharaj said he has information that a Cabinet minister tried to buy a house for $38 million in cash.

He said another Cabinet member has bought over 13 properties since being named a minister.

The properties are listed under a third-party's name, he said.

[Flex]

Jack Warner slams Pres Max.
By SHASTRI BOODAN (Guardian).

‘He’s a political puppet of the PNM’

President Max Richards is nothing more than a political puppet of the PNM says Minister of National Security and Chaguanas West MP Jack Warner. Speaking in his capacity as the UNC chairman, Warner told reporters following his Christmas treat throughout his constituency yesterday that Richards was leaving a shameful legacy.

Warner was referring to the President’s call on Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar to provide answers on Section 34. He said, “George Maxwell Richards will forever be remembered as the man who politicised the distinguished office of the presidency and compromised the traditional independent role of the position.”

Warner said Richards was extremely silent during the reign of the last PNM regime in issues surrounding the Integrity Commission. He said Richards remained quiet while being ill-treated by former prime minister Patrick Manning who built a palace next to the “presidential hut.” The minister even knocked Richards for the amount of time he spends vacationing outside of T&T.

Warner said, “In his last remaining days as President, His Excellency may feel emboldened to use his office to interfere in the politics of this nation but he may have misjudged the ire of critics and the sensitivity of the population. “The mask of President Richards has fallen and the entire nation can now see him for who he has always been—a political puppet of the former administration, placed there to bolster the political fortunes of the People’s National Movement.”

Warner said His Excellency remained respectfully quiet during that turbulent period during Manning’s reign. But the moment the government changed, he pointed out, Richards found a voice to make statements on all manner of things. “Now, against all advice, legal and moral, he questions a proclamation which all members of the Parliament, including independent senators signed and to which he himself gave authority.

“The President today, in other words, chooses to question the Government on a proclamation which he earlier assented to.” Warner said, “History will record the indignity he brought to the presidency and he will be remembered as the political President, a man who showed how unqualified he has been for the post.

“We might have forgiven him for several errors for which he became well known, including the fiasco of the Integrity Commission appointments, we might even have chosen to forget his refusal to return from vacation and fix the national shame for which he was responsible, but how can anyone ever forgive and forget this naked interference in the politics and governance of our country by our President?”

Warner distributed more than 7,000 toys at seven venues in his constituency. The programme involved five Santa Claus and helicopters landed at five venues.

[Bourbon]

Nice.