Last week, admittedly, was a week of trials and tribulations for the Government, but this does not explain the clear contradictions in the messages emanating from various ministers, including the Prime Minister, on the Udecott�Calder Hart situation. It all followed upon the resignation, last Saturday, of Calder Hart, executive chairman of Udecott, subsequent to the publication in the newspapers of documents that evidenced a familial relationship between two directors of CH Development (the company that was awarded a $368-million contract by Udecott to build the Legal Affairs Towers) and Mrs Hart. These assertions, of course, were not new. Since last May, a statement of one Carl Khan, one of the previous husbands of Mrs Calder Hart (later dubbed by the PM, presumably on facts known to him, as a "jilted lover") sworn to by statutory declaration was posted on the official Website of the Uff Commission of Enquiry.
In that statement, Mr Khan attested to the familial relationship. Mr Hart had, under oath, previously denied this. This evidence of Khan had not been shown to be manufactured, as I wrote since last May, and one would have thought that at that time it was the basis for an investigation into an offence of perjury, at the very least. Other possible offences justifying investigation could include breaches of the Prevention of Corruption Act and misbehaviour in public office.
Now that there is said to be documentary proof of the relationship, the evidence becomes more compelling. It is no longer just the word of a former husband. Carl Khan's revelations came towards the end of the inquiry. The appointment of the commission had followed the firing by the Government of one of its own ministers, said to be because he displayed "wajang" behaviour.
The minster, Dr Rowley, claimed that he was fired because of his complaints of irregularities at Udecott in this and other regards.
The inquiry was appointed to look into, among other things, the procurement practices in the construction sector. Revelations at the hearings included the fact that a fax number, which was registered as Hart's private residential line, appeared on CH's letterhead in their tender documents. While TSTT had confirmed to the Uff Commission, in 2009, that the number was Hart's private line since 1987, Hart called this "a technical glitch." Other questions continued to be raised in the inquiry, such as to cost overruns in respect of the Tarouba Stadium, which had been planned for completion three years ago for the Cricket World Cup.
Udecott, a 100 per cent, state-owned company, then sought to stall the proceedings of the commission. Before that situation was resolved, however, it was discovered that for the first time in our country, a commission of enquiry was not gazetted, as required under law. While the AG moved to correct this situation with a validation act, lawyers for Udecott and Mr Hart were still seeking to derail the probe. The inquiry was validated. Then last week came Justice Mira-Dean Armorer's judgment, in which she dismissed the judicial review case where Udecott sought to prevent Prof Uff from submitting the report of the commission. This followed hot on the heels of newspaper publications substantiating the link between Sherine Hart and directors of CH. It was in this scenario that Mr Hart tendered his resignation the very next day.
What followed was a public outcry, arising from the undoubted perception that Mr Hart had fled the country. Given the fact that he left the country with his family, the very day that the news of his resignation was released, this precipitate departure, to some, appeared to amount to an admission of guilt. Persons began talking of corruption, nepotism and billions of dollars of state resources, while pointing the finger at Hart, who had enjoyed the unswerving support of the PM. Last Tuesday, the line minister, who in Parliament proclaimed herself a "Christian with a big C" in this multiracial country, in responding to the public outcry, was both bold and insensitive enough to say that the nation should be "ashamed" of itself for hounding Calder Hart out of office.
This is in a context where her colleague, the Attorney General, had launched a criminal investigation into Udecott's operations since last September. Both of them gave press releases on Thursday. Mrs Dick-Forde's ministry officially issued a release explaining her statement to the media on Tuesday and her beliefs. The press release smacked of religious zealotry, and was entirely inappropriate of a minister of government who should understand that there is a separation of the Church and State. In other words, my soul is my business, and may be the concern of my pundit, priest and God, and not the Government. It is presumptuous of Mrs Dick-Forde to say that her ill-chosen comments were moved by her concern for the "soul of the nation". Who died and made her God? Since when has she been so concerned with the violation of rights and human dignity?
Was she not the one who made public statements about Dr Rowley and some allegedly missing $10 million in the Cleaver Heights project? Did she/her Government not then caused to be introduced into the mandate of the terms of reference of the inquiry's five items on Cleaver Heights–all of this while Tarouba is $400 million in cost overruns to date and counting? The minister has no moral authority to accuse anyone of "hounding" Calder Hart or talk of infringements on a person's right to fairness, when she herself could easily be held to be guilty of all of this in relation to Dr Rowley. At least in the case of Calder Hart, there is evidence which demands investigation. In Rowley's case, there was nothing. The Minister has made a fool of herself–and possibly her government–for yet another time.