Former attorney general and current Local Government Minister Faris Al-Rawi yesterday defended the State’s decision to enter into an indemnity agreement with King’s Counsel Vincent Nelson in the corruption matter against Anand Ramlogan and Gerald Ramdeen.
“I took the advice of eminent Senior Counsel in relation to the obligations of the Office of the Attorney General and followed that advice. The simple fact is somebody said they stole money from the Government and they pointed fingers to two other people who stole money as well. Perhaps I should return the question and ask what did you expect the State to do in the face of information?” Al-Rawi said during a virtual news briefing.
According to the former AG, the advice came from Senior Counsel Douglas Mendes and Gilbert Peterson.
That indemnity agreement between the Office of the AG and Nelson in 2017, while Al-Rawi was the Attorney General, is now being regarded as the chief reason for the collapse of the Director of Public Prosecution’s (DPP) case against Ramdeen and Ramlogan earlier this week.
This was due to the unwillingness of Nelson, the State’s main witness, to testify against Ramdeen and Ramlogan before his lawsuit over the alleged breach of the indemnity agreement with Al-Rawi is settled.
Several questions were put to Al-Rawi yesterday, but he said he had to be limited in his responses as the DPP indicated the charges against both men could be reinstated once the matter between Nelson and the State is settled.
Guardian Media asked Al-Rawi if the Cabinet and, by extension, the Prime Minister, knew about the indemnity agreement. However, he refused to answer and reiterated the fact that the case could be reopened.
But the former AG did respond to questions on if, in fact, the indemnity agreement backfired and he “shot himself in the foot” by entering into it.
“Should Mr Ramlogan and Mr Ramdeen just be given a bligh and the State does nothing? That was the question, so the State took the step of asking for advice, receiving that advice and acting accordingly, he said.”
Since the DPP’s announcement that the charges were being dropped, much has been said in the public domain about the use of taxpayers’ money for litigation that leads to no convictions.
Addressing this, Al-Rawi said, “This country has billions of dollars spent on pursuing litigation. Let’s look at a matter I recused myself from, but I will comment from afar, CLICO, let’s look at Lifesport, let’s look at the Piarco Airport, it seems to be that there’s always a choice, do something or do nothing, when you are an office holder you take advice. I didn’t advise myself on anything. What I can say is the State has an obligation to act when you’re given a written confession from somebody who has confessed to crimes and pointing out to high office holders, you have a choice, either you take action or you don’t, that is costly.”
Al-Rawi confirmed that Nelson is taking legal action against the State. Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar claimed on Tuesday that Nelson is suing the state for $150 million.
Al-Rawi did not comment on the figure but did say Nelson is seeking to recover money he would have lost out on when he was removed from his chambers due to the charges against him. However, Al-Rawi said he was advised by Mendes and Peterson that Nelson’s case is “bound to fail.”
He also advised the public to be wary of Persad-Bissessar, who he accused of trying to bait the Government and in particular himself to “over speak on a matter to fall into a trap of undue publicity, where attorneys can argue that their clients will not have a fair trial because there’s too much information in the public domain.”
“Watch Mrs Persad-Bissessar cokey eye, she has a vested interest in this matter and she’s entitled to be an advocate for her people, but the State has an obligation to manage its affairs,” Al-Rawi warned.
