Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago: Faris AL-Rawi. September 2015.

[R45]

You said your objection was based on "what I've heard of Dillon."  Now you're telling me it was based on what you personally heard him say at a town hall meeting.  I'm sorry, next time I'll stop and take time to read your mind before responding.

No you are selectively quoting. In my first reply #14 I stated that. You replied to that post first, so you obviously read it. That quote was from a subsequent reply.

Nice try though with that bullshit.

[Sando prince]

VIDEO; Swearing in of the new AG Faris Al Rawi

https://www.facebook.com/cnewslive/videos/10153565955330610/

[pull stones]

Why was the PM sworn in last?

i am already reading on line where (unc supporters) that is making a big stink saying that the PM should be sworn in first before appointing any member of cabinet. so they saying that his office is illegal and unconstitutional. my take on this is that the president should have known better, but then again this man seem to have political favorites and could be in cahoots with the now opposition.

[Bakes]

i am already reading on line where (unc supporters) that is making a big stink saying that the PM should be sworn in first before appointing any member of cabinet. so they saying that his office is illegal and unconstitutional. my take on this is that the president should have known better, but then again this man seem to have political favorites and could be in cahoots with the now opposition.

Much ado about nothing.  Powers didn't even know where to stand, let alone tell who to swear in first.  I was more distracted by Faris swearing on a Bible to be honest.

[real madness]

I understand the enthusiasm, but there is/was no reason to create a new Faris thread, one exists ... created by Jumbie 3 years ago.


What is the Faris is a lightweight argument?

What's his legal background and experience in International, Constitutional and Administrative law?  Being a 4-year (or is it 5?) parliamentarian one would assume that he's up on parliamentary procedure, which has it's use, but as the Government's lawyer he has to be a jack-of-all trades and possess facility if not mastery of them all.  His background seems to be that of a general practitioner, which should serve to help some.

Went to school with Faris.  He is a good soldier.  Plus he came from a long time PNM family and as you said Rowley has a lot of confidence in him.

I like Faris personally... I have no issue with him.  What year was he at Presentation... '87 or '88?

I believe he finished in 88.

[pull stones]

just heard on i95 that there's going to be a re-swearing in half of an hour because of the error made. i tell you, this president is a real flunky.

[asylumseeker]

i am already reading on line where (unc supporters) that is making a big stink saying that the PM should be sworn in first before appointing any member of cabinet. so they saying that his office is illegal and unconstitutional. my take on this is that the president should have known better, but then again this man seem to have political favorites and could be in cahoots with the now opposition.

Much ado about nothing.  Powers didn't even know where to stand, let alone tell who to swear in first.  I was more distracted by Faris swearing on a Bible to be honest.

I doubt that.

[Socapro]

Our President who don't have powers that we think he has is a dim wit!
He was the one who conducted the swearing in ceremoney and should have known that swearing in anyone else before swearing in the PM followed by the AG in that order is illegal.

Both the AG and the MoNS will need to take the oat again in that order but at least Dr Rowley is now legally the PM.

[Bakes]

I believe he finished in 88.

Cool 

I doubt that.

Of course you do... after all, what would I, the head of the Law Association and the Constitution itself know.

[asylumseeker]

I doubt that.

Of course you do... after all, what would I, the head of the Law Association and the Constitution itself know.

Try to make more than a lil bit of sense nah. Take off the blinkers. It was never a uniparametric issue. lol

[Bakes]

Try to make more than a lil bit of sense nah. Take off the blinkers. It was never a uniparametric issue. lol

Yuh tilting at windmills fella... straying into Controversial territory actually.  I suggest you move on.

[asylumseeker]

Try to make more than a lil bit of sense nah. Take off the blinkers. It was never a uniparametric issue. lol

Yuh tilting at windmills fella... straying into Controversial territory actually.  I suggest you move on.

Steups. Don't be a nuisance.

[Bakes]

Steups. Don't be a nuisance.

I'm being a "nuisance" only if you're being an ass... but still, I'll humor you, if only to expose your folly.  As stated, the talk about the swearing-in order is much ado about nothing, it's a highly technical trifle devoid of much substance.  The Constitution itself is silent on the issue of the particular order the individuals are sworn in, it only speaks to the elementary foundation of what constitutes a government, namely the swearing in of the Prime Minister and the Attorney General.

APPOINTMENT OF MINISTERS

76.- 1. Where there is occasion for the appointment of a Prime Minister, the President shall appoint as Prime Minister-

a. a member of the House of Representatives who is the Leader in that House of the party which commands the support of the majority of members of that House; or

b. where it appears to him that party does not have an undisputed leader in that House or that no party commands the supports of such a majority, the member of the House of Representatives who, in his judgment, is most likely to command the support of the majority of members of that House;

and who is willing to accept the office of Prime Minister.

2. The Attorney General shall, subject to section 79, be responsible for the administration of legal affairs in Trinidad and Tobago and legal proceedings for and against the State shall be taken-

a. in the case of civil proceedings, in the name of the Attorney General;

b. in the case of criminal proceedings, in the name of the State.

3. The Ministers other than the Prime Minister shall be such persons as the President, acting in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister, shall appoint from among the members of the House of Representatives and the Senators.

The Constitution states that the Ministers "other than the Prime Minister" shall... be appointed upon the advice of the Prime Minister.  The technicality of course is that Rowley had not yet been sworn in, but the it's a moot point.  There has never been a situation with any of the previous six Prime Ministers, where upon being sworn in, they then turned to the President to advise him of their candidate for Attorney General.  It's never happened.  Insteand the AG was immediately sworn in following the Prime Minister, suggesting that the President was alread advised of the choice prior to the PM's swearing in.

Not only does custom undermine the "technical" argument, but where the plain letter of the law is silent, a reviewing court would look at th legislative intent, and the legislative intent is that the President shall not make a unilateral Ministerial appointment, but rather appoint Ministers who have been suggested by the PM.  The fact that the suggestion was made while a person was still the PM-elect is of no moment.  Except to those like you who don't understand the law and issues underpining it.

[asylumseeker]

Ruff ruff! Wrong tree. Let's not pretend that any of the above (which - in its limited aspect - is quite the quantum for "much ado about nothing") was for my benefit. I don't lack an appreciation of the substance. But, since it serves your pontificating platform and self-relevance ... go for it?

Since initially broaching the subject with you, my interest in meaningful exchange regarding the issue waned several hours ago ... probably during your period of equivocation or quick primer. Nonetheless, in delivering your treatise, you omitted at least one salient consideration. Doh spend the entire night trying to resolve the deficiency. 

[Bakes]

You take yuhself entirely too seriously for yuh own good.  Good luck with yuh "salient consideration" and "deficiency" talk.  Time to move on from this and the larger "procedural" talk.

[asylumseeker]

You take yuhself entirely too seriously for yuh own good.  Good luck with yuh "salient consideration" and "deficiency" talk.  Time to move on from this and the larger "procedural" talk.

This is intriguing. Not to mention laden with irony.

[kounty]

lol. welcome back Bakes. good to read some good ole kix and quarrel on the board again. 

[asylumseeker]

Faux pas messes up Rowley’s big day
By Gail Aleander (Guardian).

Al-Rawi, Dillon sworn in twice

A sequential error in yesterday afternoon’s swearing-in ceremony of new Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley resulted in the need, several hours later, to again swear in Faris Al-Rawi as Attorney General and Major General Edmund Dillon as National Security Minister.

The error occurred during yesterday’s ceremony at Queen’s Hall, St Ann’s, where Rowley was sworn in as T&T’s seventh Prime Minister following Monday’s 23-18 general election victory by the People’s National Movement. Rowley took the oath of office as Prime Minister last yesterday. Dillon took the oath of office first, followed by Al-Rawi, who was sworn in as Attorney General.

But the sequence raised concerns from experts shortly after it occurred, since the Prime Minister is usually sworn in first followed by the Attorney General. Ministers normally are sworn in after those two top positions, which are considered the cornerstones of the Cabinet.

By 7 pm yesterday President’s House had issued a statement confirming, “there was a sequential error in the order of the oath-taking at the swearing-in ceremony of elected Prime Minister Dr Keith Christopher Rowley, Attorney General Faris Al-Rawi and National Security Minister retired Major General Edmund Dillon at Queen’s Hall, St Ann’s.

“This has been immediately rectified and the Oath of Office was retaken by Mr Al-Rawi, MP, and retired Major General Dillon, MP, and new instruments of appointment were reissued respectively at the Office of the President. “This error does not nullify in any way the oath and appointment of the duly elected Prime Minister,” the statement said.

Section 75 of the Constitution states: (1) There shall be a Cabinet for Trinidad and Tobago which shall have the general direction and control of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago and shall be collectively responsible therefore to Parliament.

Section 75 (2) states that the Cabinet shall consist of the Prime Minister and such number of other ministers (of whom one shall be the Attorney General), appointed in accordance with the provisions of section 76, as the Prime Minister may consider appropriate.

One of several Constitution experts, former president George Maxwell Richards, told T&T Guardian he didn’t think yesterday’s swearing-in situation was appropriate from the point of the Constitution. He said the Prime Minister and Attorney General should have been sworn in first and any other ministers should have followed.

Former senior officials of the Prime Minister’s Office in the past PNM regime also concurred. Law Association president Reginald Armour also said the sequencing of the swearing-in was very odd.

Former head of protocol at President’s House, Lenore Dorset, said the status of ministers sworn in before the PM were also in question, since the Constitution stated that the Cabinet shall comprise a Prime Minister and Attorney General and any other ministers as advised by the PM. She said if the National Security Minister, for example, was sworn in when the Prime Minister was not yet sworn in, that could not be a legally binding situation.

Dorset said the Prime Minister had to advise the President who, apart from the Attorney General, he would like to have in the Cabinet. She said while the Constitution was silent on the sequence in which the PM and AG should be sworn in, it is implied that one first had a Prime Minister and Attorney General and then any other ministers.

“Some legal luminaries might say it doesn’t matter once you have a Prime Minister and Attorney General but what is definitely beyond question is that you cannot swear in a minister unless there is Prime Minister sworn in first,” she said. Israel Khan, SC, said: “This was a faux pas of great magnitude and there must be an explanation and if someone advised the President this way, the President is supposed to tell that person they cannot comply with that.”

[asylumseeker]

BAD SWEAR-IN
By Sean Douglas (Newsday).

A MIX-UP in protocol yesterday saw new Attorney General, Faris Al Rawi, and new Minister of National Security, Major General Edmund Dillon, each having to take their ministerial oath of office a second time, according to a statement from the Office of President.

At the Queen’s Hall ceremony, the duo were initially and erroneously sworn in before new Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley.

President Anthony Carmona administered the oath to Al Rawi at 1.40 pm, to Dillon at 1.42 pm and to Rowley at 1.43 pm.

A source told Newsday that the error was discovered but the proceedings were allowed to run so as not to embarrass the Office of President, but with the two men then later taking the oath a second time away from public glare.

The admission of error came last evening at 6.53 pm in a statement from the Office of the President.

“There was a sequential error in the order of the oath taking at today’s swearing-in ceremony of elected Prime Minister Dr Keith Christopher Rowley, Attorney General Faris Al Rawi and National Security Minister, retired Major General Edmund Dillon, at Queen’s Hall, St Ann’s,” said the statement.

“This has been immediately rectified and the Oath of Office was retaken by Mr Al Rawi MP and Retired Major General Dillon MP, and new instruments of appointment were reissued respectively at the Office of The President.

This error does not nullify in any way the oath and appointment of the duly elected Prime Minister.” Sources told Newsday that the second swearing-in occurred “shortly after” the official ceremony, and said that the official statement implied that it took place at President’s House.

Al Rawi told Newsday, “I noticed the order of the taking of the oath and brought it to the attention of the Office of President, and I am pleased that it was handled with immediacy.

I accept that it was a simple administrative error on the part of the organisers at the Office of the President.” Dillon too was unfazed by the mishap. “It was handled by President’s House officials quite comfortably,” he told Newsday.

“Let’s just leave it at that. It’s a President’s House function.” Asked if the mix-up took the sheen off the event, Dillon replied, “Not as far as I’m concerned.

It was handled by the officers at President’s House, and that’s good enough for me.” Fuelling speculation as to how the mix-up could have occurred, Newsday learnt that the Office of the President’s oath-book actually lists correctly the positions to be sworn-in the proper sequential order of firstly Prime Minister, secondly AG and thirdly other minister(s).

In an interview, on Radio i95.5 FM yesterday, President’s House former protocol officer Lenore Dorset said she did not know the current inner-workings of President’s House but said the two office- holders usually responsible for organising events for His Excellency are the Aide-de-Camp and the Secretary to the President.

She advocated the need to follow protocol by saying it is the mortar that holds everything together.

“We must not jump to conclusions in the matter,” she said.

“We have to think about this very carefully. What lessons do we learn? We need to be a little more careful in going over our plan.” Former government chief whip, Dr Roodal Moonilal, was scathing in his criticism which he laid at the feet of the new Government.

“They started on the wrong foot. They blunder at the first point even before becoming ministers,” he told Newsday. “It is common knowledge that the Prime Minister must take his oath first so that his advice can be acted upon to swear in his ministers. So they were swearing all day. It is a sad but symbolic of the incompetence that we expect in the days ahead.” Senior Counsel Israel Khan commented, “The Prime Minister enjoys the status of primus inter pares (“first amongst equals”). The Constitution says there is a Cabinet, comprising a Prime Minister and Attorney General. The Prime Minister is named first as he is the one who will select ministers. How come he was sworn in third? He should have been first.” The need to swear in the Prime Minister as the first member of Cabinet is implied by a reading of the TT Constitution, in section 76.

This section in sequential order mentions the Prime Minister first (s 76(1)), then the AG second (s 76(2)) and other Ministers third (s 76(3).

[asylumseeker]

lol. welcome back Bakes. good to read some good ole kix and quarrel on the board again. 

He jes cyah resist ... so I thought I would help restore him to his natural environment. The jury is still out on progress.

[Brownsugar]

Confirmed Faris as AG; Dillon for National Security.

I knew the latter was happening, but I was hoping it wasn't the case. I listened to Dillon at a town hall and I was very unimpressed. I don't get why we keep putting leaders of the regiment as Ministers of National Security. We need a complete reform of the police service (from the ground up), and military leadership isn't necessarily what we need to get us there. We need a demilitarization of the police with an emphasis on basic education, investigative skills, understanding of criminal law, and community relations. That's entirely different from the role of the defense force.

I'm hoping for a change but initial signs/comments really don't suggest we will be getting a different approach.

You write off the man after listening to him at one Town Hall meeting??  Okay then.....

[Bakes]

lol. welcome back Bakes. good to read some good ole kix and quarrel on the board again. 

Just breezing thru fuh de hour breds 

[R45]

You write off the man after listening to him at one Town Hall meeting??  Okay then.....

Skepticism isn't writing someone off, calm yourself. I'm hopeful for change, but not optimistic based on initial impressions.

[Flex]

Faris fires six from Jack’s case.
By Derek Achong (Guardian).

State lawyers to get chance

Attorney General Faris Al-Rawi has fired almost the entire legal team hired to represent the State in the extradition case of corruption accused former Fifa vice-president Jack Warner.

The T&T Guardian was reliably informed that Al-Rawi held a meeting at his Cabildo Chambers, St Vincent Street, Port-of-Spain, offices yesterday afternoon, where he informed three lawyers from the eight-member team—Jagdeo Singh, Gerald Ramdeen and Brent Hallpike—that their services were no longer required. The other lawyers who were relieved from the case but were not present at the meeting were Allan Newman, QC; Israel Khan, SC; and Wayne Sturge. Though Singh had returned his brief for the case earlier this week he was still invited to the meeting.

British extradition expert James Lewis, QC, and local Senior Counsel Pamela Elder were the two kept on by the AG.

A source told the T&T Guardian that Al-Rawi told the lawyers the decision was taken because the team of private lawyers chosen by his predecessor Garvin Nicholas was too large and their duties could be handled by state attorneys working within his ministry.

Before assuming office after last week's general election, Al-Rawi was critical of Nicholas' selections after it was revealed the team had billed the State for a combined total of over $12 million for preliminary work in the case, which is yet to start before Chief Magistrate Marcia Ayers-Caesar. However, the source revealed the AG's office was yet to pay the invoices the lawyers had submitted.

The T&T Guardian attempted to contact the lawyers involved yesterday but they all refused to make a public statement.

In a brief telephone interview yesterday, Al-Rawi also refused to comment on any matter related to the case.

“I do not propose to conduct state litigation in the media. I must be guided by my constitutional and statutory remit and certainly intend to bring a measure of discipline and coordination to the Office of the AG,” Al-Rawi said.

The lawyers’ last work on this case was on Wednesday, when Hallpike wrote to Ayers-Caesar on Al-Rawi’s behalf seeking an extension of the deadline for him to sign off on the authority to proceed in the case. The authority to proceed is required to kick off the proceedings before Ayers-Caesar.

In asking for the deadline to be extended to next Monday, the next scheduled hearing, Hallpike said Al-Rawi needed additional time to consider the case file sent by United States authorities and to give Warner’s legal team an opportunity to make representations before he signed the document.

Nicholas, who was in charge of the case since Warner was indicted in May, repeatedly denied Warner that opportunity. Hallpike added that Al-Rawi reconsidered Nicholas’ decision because while it was within his discretion, it opened the door to a possible judicial review challenge from Warner.

Hallpike noted that Al-Rawi’s offer was being complicated by Warner’s attorneys, who refused to participate initially as they described the roundabout turn on the issue as an “attempt to barter with the liberty of one of its citizens.”

Ayers-Caesar is expected to pronounce on the request for an extension next week. In the event she refuses it, Warner will be discharged and the US will have to start the process afresh.

[Bourbon]

Justified.

[Jumbie]

Posted this moments ago in the JW thread.. probably fitting here as well?

[Deeks]

From BBC. Jack's extradition proceedings approved by the AG.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34318353


US extradition proceedings against Jack Warner, a former vice-president of football's world governing body Fifa, are to go ahead after being approved by Trinidad's attorney general.

The US wants to try Mr Warner, 72, a Trinidadian national, on corruption charges. He is accused of accepting millions of dollars in bribes.

He and 13 other current or former Fifa officials were indicted in May.

He denies the charges and is currently fighting the extradition attempt.

Last week, Switzerland approved the extradition of ex-Fifa Vice-President Eugenio Figueredo to the US.




Mr Figueredo, from Uruguay, was arrested in May while in Switzerland for a Fifa congress.

So far, only one arrested official - former Fifa Vice-President Jeffrey Webb, from the Cayman Islands - has agreed to be extradited.

After being extradited from Switzerland to the US, Mr Webb pleaded not guilty to accepting bribes worth millions of dollars in connection with the sale of marketing rights.

He was placed under house arrest on $10m (£6.4m) bail by a New York judge.

The king of Caribbean football

As the head of Caribbean and North and Central American football (Concacaf), Mr Warner was one the most powerful men in world football.

His support was seen as essential for any World Cup host bid. However, he has been dogged by allegations of corruption.

The US alleges that Mr Warner has been involved in corrupt practices for more than two decades.

Mr Warner's case has been adjourned until Friday due to a legal dispute over a technicality.

In June 2015, a BBC investigation found evidence of bribes paid to Mr Warner.


Jack Warner: The US charge sheet
◾Accused of racketeering, wire fraud, money laundering, bribery
◾From the early 1990s, he allegedly "began to leverage his influence and exploit his official positions for personal gain"
◾Allegedly accepted a $10m bribe from South African officials in return for voting to award them the 2010 World Cup
◾Allegedly bribed officials with envelopes each containing $40,000 in cash; when one demurred, he allegedly said: "There are some people here who think they are more pious than thou. If you're pious, open a church, friends. Our business is our business"

[Flex]

All expenses to be reviewed—AG
By Gail Alexander (Guardian).

Attorney General Faris Al-Rawi estimates about $1 billion in legal fees were paid to attorneys by state enterprises and ministries during the People’s Partnership administration’s tenure, with million-dollar sums paid to some, including one attorney who was paid $60m and $1.3m earned by another who was “eight months out of law school.”

Speaking in yesterday’s 2016 Budget debate, Al-Rawi said from now, senior counsel will only be used where required with junior attorneys, and all expenses will be reviewed. He said payment will be based on “quantum merit” and vouching for hours of work done.

The AG did not identify any of the lawyers who benefitted under the previous administration.

Al-Rawi said the Ministry of the Attorney General, Justice and Legal Affairs collectively received in the last five years, $5 billion. He said taxpayers should know what value for money was obtained for this and what benefits were accrued for an estimated $13b spent (under sectoral heads) over the same period. He said there was a lot of room for improving efficiency by improving spending efficiency.

Al-Rawi noted the sum of $444m had been identified in the last term as legal fee payments by one ministry alone between 2010-2015 regarding lawyers who were not full time, hired by the AG’s division then.

He also sought a list of legal fees for 107 state enterprises and after initial review got a report from 60.

The sum spent by the 60 was $292.2m in legal fees and of the 22 ministries now existing under the new administration, a handful reported legal fees ranging from $1.9m to $155.3m, he added.

He estimated total legal fees would be around $900m for the five years and “conservatively” would eventually total about $1b when all other state enterprises reported.

Al-Rawi questioned the “legacy” which the payments had brought taxpayers. He noted that Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley, while in Opposition, noting the expansion in legal fees in the PP’s second Budget, had warned against PP witch-hunting in the event expenditure associated with this became a scandal.

Within the $900m sum in those agencies which have reported so far, Al-Rawi listed a number of figures paid to lawyers whose names he didn’t call (See box).

In adding up 11 lawyers only, he said this for instance totalled $245.2m. He said this included one who was eight months out of law school and who earned $1.3m. Al-Rawi also alluded to another who earned $60m.

Al-Rawi said a “scandalous” situation had occurred with partial proclamation of the Children’s Authority Act regarding children’s homes under the PP’s Gender, Youth and Child Development Ministry. He said the situation resulted in the relevant children’s homes not being capable of legally housing youths in detention.

He said former attorney general Anand Ramlogan is however prosecuting a case regarding housing of such detained youths and was “ensuring the state pays damages” as a result of his (Ramlogan’s) government’s proclamation moves on the matter.

Al-Rawi said the state has had to pay sums ranging from $125,000 and $250,000 to litigants on the issue. He said 72 youths were detained in the nation’s penal system and he could see such payments mushrooming among the number. Consequently, Al-Rawi said an emergency situation now exists and the new government’s public sector plan will have to deal with the issue concerning children’s homes.

Al-Rawi said expenditure was also incurred in the proclamation of the Proceeds of Crime Act—and Ramlogan is also challenging a matter on this legislation. Al-Rawi said the PP Government didn’t do what it was supposed to do with this act. He claimed Ramlogan was now profiting from this. Al-Rawi also said PP also had as attorney general Garvin Nicholas. Rowley at his side muttered “political enterprise...”

During cross talk during his contribution, House Speaker Bridgid Annisette-George warned MPs to respect each other.

SUMS PAID

Attorney 1 - $58.1m

Attorney 2 - $35.8m

Attorney 3 - $13.3m

Attorney 4 - $26.5m

Attorney 5 - $24.5m

Attorney 6 - $13.7m

Attorney 7 - $16.5m

Attorney 8 - $50.073m

No forensic audit of LifeSport

The Attorney General’s office will establish a tracking committee on death penalty issues and Assizes matters including to say why the penalty isn’t being implemented, since Government intends to apply the law and due process, Attorney General Faris Al-Rawi also said.

He also said no forensic audit by the AG’s office was called into the ill-fated half billion Life Sport programmes. He said he’d checked with the Finance Ministry and found this.

Al-Rawi said he intends to do an immediate revision of matters occupying state attention with objectivity and transparent advice, and ensure institutional strengthening for the AG’s office.

Al-Rawi said in his first week at the ministry, he found 100 large garbage bags filled with shredded documents—government property—piled to the ceiling.

He added: “Up to now I can’t get an explanation why the shredders were at work over the weekend and why it was done that weekend, no one knows who shredded it...”

The AG said he found a 2014 legal opinion on LifeSport that a forensic probe was needed to compile evidence which was needed to decide if action should be taken against public officers in the issue and if there was any real or “fanciful” chance of recovering money. He said examination of LifeSport found breaches of “everything possible” yet the public servant named in the issue was appointed to the Prime Minister’s office and the issue is still under probe.

Al-Rawi said he’s instructed attorneys to write former prime minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar, past national security minister John Sandy, the past AG and retired DCP Mervyn Richardson to give evidence regarding report of an alleged assassination attempt on PP MPs. He said if they didn’t respond they would be subpoenaed and “treated as hostile witnesses.”

Al-Rawi also said he’d asked the PP-appointed Las Alturas Commission of Enquiry if they wanted an extension and the PNM government would ensure all commissions continued. He said the COE has sought extention and an “uplifting” fee. But he said the commission in pursuit of the $26m issue had so far spent $18m on legal fees.

[Flex]

STATE WITNESS KAMLA
By Andre Bagoo (Newsda)

ATTORNEY General Faris Al-Rawi yesterday disclosed he has instructed State attorneys to take steps to subpoena Opposition Leader Kamla Persad- Bissessar to testify in a lawsuit brought against the State, in relation to the detention of persons accused in 2011, of being involved in a plot to murder Persad-Bissessar (who was then prime minister) and high-ranking members of the People’s Partnership Cabinet.

The AG’s move would appear to raise the prospect of the current Opposition Leader being brought to testify on behalf of the State, in court proceedings due to be heard in coming weeks.

In an immediate response, Persad-Bissessar said that up to yesterday she received no formal request to testify in any matter, but warned that the Attorney General’s presentation in Parliament risked violation of the sub judice principle, which seeks to prevent pressure being exerted on the outcome of cases before the court.

She denied any direct role in the detention of persons in relation to matters raised in 2011 and said any actions which took place would have been done properly by law enforcement agencies and on the basis of intelligence gathered by operational agencies acting independently of the Executive.

Al-Rawi used his contribution to the Budget debate yesterday to update MPs on a series of court matters now looming.

“All of us remember the assassination attempt: an allegation that there was an assassination attempt against certain past members of Government,” the Attorney General said. He said the State faces a bill for damages in relation to an ongoing lawsuit brought by persons detained in 2011 under State of Emergency (SoE) powers. However, Al Rawi said former Cabinet members have declined to give evidence in defence of the State.

“Madam Speaker, I instructed attorneys at the Ministry of the Attorney General to write to the Member for Siparia, the past Attorney General Anand Ramlogan, the past Minister of National Security Brigadier (John) Sandy and one (retired deputy police commissioner) Mervyn Richardson to tell them they have an obligation to give evidence which is outstanding in these matters,” Al Rawi disclosed.

“Because Trinidad and Tobago is now facing a case where we are in court and we can’t get the evidence as to the root of what caused people to be detained.” Al-Rawi said he instructed lawyers to first write the former Cabinet members and, if they decline to testify, compel them to appear in court under orders.

“I instructed the lawyers saying, write them and if they don’t respond, subpoena them in court and treat them as hostile witnesses.” There was desk-thumping at this point on the Government benches.

“I don’t say that other than to say that the ultimate people who will pay the award for damages are taxpayers. Perhaps it is that the Member for Siparia will say she did not know about it. If so then we will hear her. But the fact is that my obligation, the Government’s obligation, the role and function I must perform is to deal with the taxpaying dollars of Trinidad and Tobago,” Al Rawi said.

In August 2011, a SoE was called amid a spike in murders and reports of activities by entities tied to the illicit drug trade.

In justifying the SoE, then President George Maxwell Richards who signed the declaration, cited, “multiple murders and an upsurge in gang-related violence”.

In a letter to MPs, the then President stated, “Our criminal intelligence gathered by national security agencies shows that the escalation in violent criminal activity is linked to recent success of the police in certain drug trafficking and interdiction exercises which led to the seizure of large quantities of drugs with a street value of several millions of dollars. Drugs with a street value in excess of $20 million were seized in just one raid on August 16, 2011. There is the real risk of reprisal and retaliation by gangs that will compromise and can continue to compromise and endanger public safety, law and order.” In November of that year, during the SoE, 16 persons were detained under emergency powers and the then Prime Minister said plotters had planned an “evil, devious act of treason”, as retaliation for drug busts undertaken during the emergency.

Though a confidential Special Branch report dated November 18, 2011, stated, the “likeliness of the threat was high”, the 16 persons were freed. The developments came on the eve of a two-day visit by Cuban leader Raul Castro.

The Attorney General did not give details of the specific case under discussion, but it has been reported that a lawsuit against the State in relation to the detention of persons during the 2011 state of emergency is due to be heard on October 15 and October 21 respectively for two litigants.

Ashmeed Mohammed and Dominic Pitilal have commenced legal proceedings in a case to which former Attorney General Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj has been tied.

During yesterday’s tea-break, Persad-Bissessar said she has received no request to testify in any matter.

“I have received no request,” she said. “No one has requested me to give evidence and I don’t know what he’s talking about.” The former Prime Minister said the Executive does not get involved in operational matters handled by law enforcement authorities but simply acts on the advice of these agencies.

“All of those things we do not get involved in,” Persad-Bissessar said. “At no time do we get involved in the day-to-day operations of those entities such as the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service. They would be the ones who would bring information.” In relation to the issuing of detention orders — a process which must be signed-off by the Minister of National Security — the former Prime Minister said she had no role in those matters.

“No, I had no role with respect to that,” she said. “It was not a Cabinet process. It is not that someone comes and asks to arrest someone, they do what they do.” Under the Emergency Powers Regulations 2011 it is for the Minister of National Security to order the detention of any person, “with a view to preventing him acting in any manner prejudicial to public safety or public order or the defence of Trinidad and Tobago.” The regulations establish an independent tribunal which has oversight of the process of detention.

Efforts to contact former Minister of National Security John Sandy and former Attorney General Anand Ramlogan were unsuccessful.

[Sando prince]

.
VIDEO Report; http://www.tv6tnt.com/sevenpm-news/-AG-COMMITTED-TO-ENFORCING-DEATH-PENALTY-6061---332590512.html

AG COMMITTED TO ENFORCING DEATH PENALTY

It's on the law books but has not been enforced in years. Now, the nation's new Attorney General wants the hangman to resume his work, but this may be easier said than done.

.