Monday September 6th, 2010
- Last update:23 min 36 sec ago
Football
Cricket
Ish, Steve closer to US trial
Court throws out constitution motion
Published: 30 Jul 2010
A High Court Judge has dismissed a constitutional motion filed by businessmen Ishwar Galbaransingh and Steve Ferguson in which they were challenging the constitutionality of the Extradition Act (1985).
This latest judgment means that the two men are one step closer to being extradited to the US to face a total of 95 criminal charges relating to the construction of Piarco Airport terminal building. The men filed the motion two years ago but it was only on June 14 that the case was called before Justice Vasheist Kokaram in the Port-of-Spain High Court. That motion came ended in the San Fernando Supreme Court on July 16. Douglas Mendes, SC, represented the Attorney General in the motion. Through their attorney, Fyard Hosein, SC, the men argued that the Extradition Act 1985, as amended by the Extradition Amendment Act No 12 of 2004, infringed their fundamental rights and liberties preserved under the constitution.
Yesterday, in his 24-page ruling, Kokaram, presiding in the Port-of-Spain High Court, said the act was not unconstitutional and it did not breach Galbaransingh and Ferguson’s right to freedom of movement. Kokaram said: “The act does not infringe the claimants right to the protection of the law nor equality before the law.” He added that the act was consistent with the achievement of substantial justice. Kokeram said he believed the system of extradition on the whole was fair. “There is no right recognised in the constitution as the right not be extradited,” Kokeram added.
He said extradition was an acceptable restriction on the freedom of movement. He said Galbaransingh and Ferguson were neither banished or exiled from T&T but were surrendered to the US in an interactive process of criminal justice. Galbaransingh, chairman of Northern Construction Ltd, and Ferguson, former CEO of the Maritime General Insurance Co Ltd, are wanted in the US on charges of conspiracy to engage in money-laundering and bid-rigging, arising from the award of contracts in the Piarco Airport development project.
On May 4, 2006, a Florida State grand jury returned an indictment against them and six others. They were indicted on charges relating to corrupt practices in two of the construction packages in the project. The local Court of Appeal dismissed the extradition appeal of the men on May 3. Last month the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London refused to grant leave to the two businessmen to appeal the matter to the British law lords. The men have been in prison since June 15.
Galbaransingh and Ferguson were among eight persons charged in 2002 with corruption arising out of the same project. The preliminary inquiry, which began more than two years ago, is still in progress. More charges were laid in 2004 against 11 persons, including three Americans.
No problem that four legal
No problem that four legal luminaries could not solve.
Aka:fairplay
Ramlogan don't have the
Ramlogan don't have the BALLS. These 'Businessmen' will hear "WELCOME TO MIAMI" any day now.
These are not those 'leaders' from up the hill who will sing a Bhajan for their supper.. This is the Big Leagues baby.
Go ahead, make their day.
drunk or retarded?
drunk or retarded?
BLACK!!! Eric Himpton
BLACK!!!
Eric Himpton Holder, Jr. (born January 21, 1951) is the 82nd and current Attorney General of the United States and the first African American to hold the position.[1] He is serving under President Barack Obama.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Holder
ok, clearly you're retarded.
ok, clearly you're retarded. i guess the US is preparing to invade Switzerland for roman polanski because they refused to extradite.
The AG has had the benefit
The AG has had the benefit of several opinions of learned counsel. It's now decision time. To extradite or not to extradite. That's the question. Ramlogan must stop stalling and get on with the task at hand, one way or the other.
The Prince - It would be a
The Prince - It would be a shame if we allow our citizens to be transported to the U.S. simply because the U.S. requested them; treaty or not.
There are other countries that have entered into extradition treaties with the U.S. but have refused to hand over their citizens - U.K. and Switzerland?
These two allegedly committed their crimes in T&T and as citizens of this country they should be tried here first, and if found guilty serve their time here, and at the end of which the U.S. can have them if they so desire for alleged crimes involving the U.S.
Whether the U.S. is 'big brother' to T&T or not should not be a deciding factor.
I do not know either of these men other than from media reports; however, they are citizens of T&T and we have a responsibility to look after our own. The U.S. does, and would not allow their American citizens to be shafted around the world; a lesson for us to learn from.
Mr. Ramlogan should know that the ball is now in his court and any decision that he makes would reflect upon his credibility or not as our A.G.
But then again we are screaming for the resumption of Hangings in T&T!
Plus, we have many T&T citizens living illegally in the U.S. and working 'under the table'.
Gardenia
PS: MICHAEL ANTHONY GREEN, a Houston, Texas resident has now been cleared by DNA after serving 27 years of imprisonment in the U.S. prison system. The longest time behind bars of any Texan. That's how perfect is the Legal System in the U.S. This is just one of the many cases of a similar nature.
People Thinker is just doing
People Thinker is just doing what he is probably being paid to do because i cant see any one in their right mind who would think that they should be extradited except for a family member and further more the final descision is the AG's and we all know what he is going to say.......................................
I hope Manning and Hart get
I hope Manning and Hart get the same due process has these crimin..I mean "businessmen."
Listen up if the AG set his
Listen up if the AG set his friends free he should dare not touch Manning, Hart, Abu Baker or no body if it is freedom for one then its freedom for all.
Double Dee....If these
Double Dee....If these people were ordinary joe and jane public they would already be in their eight year in jail,so what is good for the goose should be good for the gander.Send they to the US let them face the jury and let the chips fall where they may.
Some persons are attacking
Some persons are attacking the Judge for his ruling. Others simply have a political motive.
These gentlemen, Ish and Steve, have been accused of crimes in the US - wire fraud etc.; as well as being partners in crime in the T&T airport fiasco. These latter charges were dropped in favour of extradition to face charges in the US.
If Uncle Sam thinks that you have compromised the integrity of its tax regime you will be sought by the federal law enforcement authorities in the US and sorted out. Uncle Sam wants every tax dollar ... unlike T&T.
My stand has always been that they should be tried for charges in T&T first. The US charges should not trump the T&T charges.
However, prosecution of the charges in T&T have been foregone in favour of the US charges. It would be interesting to see whether the T&T charges would be reinstated if the decision is not to extradite.
The repercussions could be costly. Case in point; Dudus Coke in Jamaica; except Ish and Steve do not have a Tivoli Gardens.
Further, What is the role of the DPP in all of this if a decision is made by the AG not to extradite? Would the charges be reinstated and the legal merry-go-round continue?
Now Mr. AG, your mettle is being tested. This is not a question of story time on who, what and how much was misapproriated by the former regime. Legal opinions abound but there is one decision to be made
This is a DECISION that YOU must make in your role as AG. This is where we separate the MEN from the BOYS.
God speed Mr. AG. T&T is watching.
KO
KO,you have made one of the
KO,you have made one of the most impartial post I have seen on this matter and I agree with most of the points you have made.This matter had/has serious ramifications for the nation any which way you look at it.
I have noticed,despite(probably in-spite) of the evidence given by Ish and Steve former friends(evidence they were jailed and fined for) some posters carry on as these two are the only victims in this web of corruption.Some demand,jail Manning,Caulder and their bunch of cronies,and without missing a beat say free Ish and Steve,ironic!
The judge is now the new target,"he's young,he's inexperience,he should rewrite the law" This treaty is an old(US/UK) treaty,revamped with the Ship Rider added on,signed by the US and TT during Panday's administration...this is not new law!
Anyway KO,
Thanks
so why not drop all local
so why not drop all local matters and proceed with extradition?
POP SOME NECKS MR AG!!!
POP SOME NECKS MR AG!!!
ya, that's a good one.
ya, that's a good one. haven't heard it before. this should totally be a death penalty case.
People think taxpaying ends
People think taxpaying ends with the extradition: Remember, we will have to have our people there too, and all the evidence- which 95% is in Trinidad- has to be sent there, and we have to hire our own legal people licensed to practice in the USA, and pay for the transport of the prisoners, hotel rooms for the length of the trial for our people, etc. Remember, we don't wash our hands of it once it goes to the USA, we actually get to pay more for it, and it never goes away. I don't agree with the extradition morally, but also, the exchange rate at 6.3 to 1 is just bad business! Moral responsibilities and economic realities exist which really makes this a common sense matter. But common sense not so common anymore....
In these circumstances, the
In these circumstances, the economic argument against extradition is flawed. Hitherto, in excess of TT250M have been recovered, both in the foreign and local courts, arising out of the Piarco Airport Scandal. The cost of extradition due to taxpayers is less than the monies recovered.
The law might be an ass, however we are choosing not the disembark the donkey if we agree to have the businessmen tried in a country where:
(1) Individuals can transform from judges into political candidates in one day
(2) The pace of justice delivery is painfully slow and
(3) The accused can continue delaying their fate through endless loads of litigating meant only to delay
In in interest of justice, the accused should be extradited. If they are innocent, then they have nothing to fear.
"In in interest of justice,
"In in interest of justice, the accused should be extradited. If they are innocent, then they have nothing to fear".
-what about this for a thought: In the interest of justice the accused should be tried in T&T where charges are still pending. If they are innocent then they can be extradited.
But i get it. That makes too much sense and is far too complicated for the 'pop some neck' crowd.
Don't know where you get
Don't know where you get your information, but it is an opinion and a very flawed one at that. Trinidad and Tobago does not bear costs when another country requests extradition of any of its citizens. That expense is borne by the country making the request.
oh machineass, you're wining
oh machineass, you're wining is nauseating. at least you didn't copy/paste the extradition garbage this time. you're making progress machineass, keep it up. well done loser.
Dooks you are wrong,the US
Dooks you are wrong,the US Marshall Service would send agents to escort the accused to a federal prison(I hope that's not what you consider a hotel)and since they are accused of planning,conspiracy and executing those plans in the US,together with Hillman and others(who squealed)most,if not all of the evidence is already in the possession of US authorities,courtesy of Steve and Ish former friends.
For simplicity,under US law,they are accused for planning and executing parts of those plans in the US,carrying out the plan in TT is another matter.
As in all jurisdictions,if you request witnesses in a criminal matter you pay the costs,so in this instance,the US would be obliged to bear any cost.
Keep Good!
True about the young judge
True about the young judge in the case. If Volney was on the bench still he would have something to say. All judges with any experienced worth their pay-grade do. But the new ones are just learning right now, now finding a voice. And until they do, until they have that experience they have nothing much to add to the direction our country takes. These men are called 'justices', he still thinks that he's a 'lawyer'... a layman of the law, not able to dispense justice. The job requires somebody with the salt to make the tough calls, who serves justice, and serves the law... and the people who may be disenfranchised by either.
Kokaram is so new to the
Kokaram is so new to the bench that it seems that he is just making sure not to make a decision. He was a lawyer for a while, but the boy is probably now about to turn 40. He has no experience with this sort of thing. A more experienced judge would have given an actual opinion, whereas all he is able to do is hide behind what is the nonchalance of the law, rather than it's equality. This is unfortunate because a more experienced judge would have had the know-how and responsibility of being able to say what the case actually consists of, and whether they believe it is right or wrong. All Kokaram says is that the law doesn't provide for protection from extradition. A more experienced judge would have provided that protection if citizens should have it, because they understand that their decisions are what make the law. So he has said that our citizens are unprotected by this loophole, but he's not willing to close the loophole. Irresponsible, inexperienced, unsure- he is just an OJT!
Hasley Pierre, Are you
Hasley Pierre,
Are you suitably qualified to make this statement? Could you substitute a judgement of your own that's more acceptable? Also, since you are under the assumption that experience is totally synonymous with age, perhaps you can petition an "older" more "experienced" judge to provide us with a sample ruling that does not suffer from the endemic errancy of youth.
Hasley Pierre What the hell
Hasley Pierre What the hell is your authority here? Do you have any "locus standi" to critcise the judge's decision in that manner. Are you the Court of Appeal or the Privy Council? Your comments are in bad taste. If his judgement was different you would have been praising him for the long way he has come at such a young age of 40. But I guess since the grapes have denied you the privilege of its taste so it would obviously be sour for you.
I have as much authority as
I have as much authority as anyone else, I am a citizen of Trinidad and Tobago. But I am also well versed, in the reality of laws, the mechanics of the legal system. And I never said I was batting for any side, nor can my comments be interpreted as such, not logically anyway. Simply put, this is am important matter. I am very familiar with Kokaram, I know new judges and I know seasoned judges, and the pressure on him is such that being new, he cannot act as judges are expected to act. Seasoned ones with a track record can act. They are not only servants of the laws, they are the architects. They are the keepers of justice, not just the law. Anyone familiar with a progressive justice system is aware of this. I read the actual document sirs, I didn't just read the highlights in the newspaper. Believe me, he ducked and ran. Left the heavy lifting to Anand. Was a cowardly act (if you read the document) to see how many ways he let himself off the hook. This generation of judges aren't the ones who value the independence we fought for. They just don't get it. We define ourselves. And he is supposed to define our country too, to leave his mark. He needs a history lesson maybe, a mentor who has been there before. That's all. He will be better in the future. But I have read many opinions (the judges opinion attached to decision) and this has to be the most disappointing. Read it thoroughly before you respond. You'll see what I mean.
...I have to agree with you
...I have to agree with you on this one Thinker, a judge rules on what is put before him, Mr. Justice Kokaram did just that, he was charged to rule on the constitutionality of the extradition act and his ruling should either be accepted or appealed...
Zando Lee, Finally and
Zando Lee, Finally and gradually you are beginning to see the light. Look I have no persoal stake in this matter. I simply give my views with my limted knowledge in law and my own capacity for expecting justice and fairplay. And that's all. Either way this goes we will have to live with it. So what?
ah stinker, i must say your
ah stinker, i must say your seemingly made-up penchant for fairplay is cute. your idea of fairplay is comical.
Maybe thats why he gave that
Maybe thats why he gave that judgement...he's new to the bench and not yet tainted....I wonder if it was someone experienced as Volney what the judgement would have been like??
WEll, I would point you in
WEll, I would point you in the direction of another response somebody left above the one I wrote that makes the point well. Truthfully, as lawyers these guys defend and prosecute by citing the law, everything they do and say is defined by the law. But as a judge, they define the law... and that takes some time to be able to do with confidence and clarity. The experience factor is huge because you can see by his rulings that he is not sticking his neck out even a little, nor is stating his belief like the more experienced judges- not just in T& T, but worldwide- tend to do when giving their decisions. Do you really believe that he will not be a better judge with more timed served on the bench? Of course he will. Experience brings wisdom, which judges need to do their job correctly.But he not there yet, clearly.
Officers of the court do not
Officers of the court do not define the law, they interpret it. There is a difference.
Of course they define the
Of course they define the law. They make decisions on cases, and if the current law is not properly versed, their decision on the matter sets a precedence for future decisions. We have a progressive law system in Trinidad. Laws in the books cannot expect every situation, so, built into the system (in almost every country)is a self-adaptive process which can make laws by setting precedence. He had an opportunity to do that today, and he stepped back from it to let somebody else with more mettle make the call. It's like a surgeon deciding to pass along the surgery to another surgeon because he doesn't want a death on his scorecard... so he just passes the buck. Essentially the same thing. He had an opportunity, and he showed what he is made of, that's all I'm saying. In time he will be better, but right now, he avoided the controversy by not making the call. Someone I know and respect has a plaque on their desk, it says "THE BUCK STOPS HERE". The judge could have manned-up, believe me he could have, and chose not to. So now the AG better have the cojones to make the right call. And the country better step up and act like "the buck stops here'. Too many passing on their responsibilities. Trinidad can deal with this situation... or I might be wrong, as a country we might be like Judge Kokaram... we might not have the stomach or the mettle to do the job.
Hasley Pierre could you
Hasley Pierre could you enlighten those like myself,who thinks that there is nothing that Justice Kolaram could have done differently in this matter.
On what points of law,should he have decided differently? those advanced by the defense learned counsels,Clarke,Bellof,and others? is it that what you are saying? If it's that you are saying,I am suggesting to you that these said gentlemen,could make a credible argument for the prosecution if they were paid to do so.
You have attacked the judge's character,his competence and accused him of cowardice, to what end?
Hasley your attempt at putting the AG and the nation on a GUILT TRIP is what I call gutless,and an attempt to pass the buck.I did not plan,execute,conspire to execute any illegal activity in the US,so unlike those who did,and AKON...."don't put the blame on me"
No answers for you
No answers for you trinialex? He who bumps gum and runs away, etc, etc...
Our citizens have rights,
Our citizens have rights, these rights must be upheld here at home. The last AG started this whole extradition process as a political thing, to drag them out before the elections and make it an issue. Now this AG is left in a situation that he knows started because of doing the wrong thing, but, because his party was close to these men, in doing the right thing and keeping the trial here, he may look like he is doing the wrong thing. He is in a tough situation. But at the end of the day he must do what is right. While Kokaram says in his opinion that the constitution doesn't protect our citizens from extradition, it becomes very clear, that someone has to. This is a slippery slope. We're supposed to have this trial here, no matter who the citizen is, they should have a right to a local trial first when the alleged crime is said to have been committed locally. The AG must look out for the law, and equally for citizens when the law does not specifically g grant them a right that they should have.
People keep forgetting
People keep forgetting -
Yes, OUR citizens have rights. However, those rights, constitutional and otherwise can be signed away when a government makes laws. In the case of extradition, it would usually involve some requirement from a foreign country. On that basis alone can a citizen be stripped of some of his rights. He could always appeal, but because of the laws agreed to, it will only delay the inevitable.
On Monday March 4th, 1996, the United National Congress government which included current PM Kamla Persad-Bissessar, agreed to and signed away the rights of our nationals (as far as extradition goes) by signing the extradition treaty with the US. Our rights were further signed away with the Shiprider agreement which allows (present tense) the US authorities to stop, board, search and detain ANY vessel IN OUR OWN WATERS OR AIRSPACE upon mere suspicion of some crime whether real or imagined.
["However, those rights,
["However, those rights, constitutional and otherwise can be signed away when a government makes laws."]
...what utter nonsense...what rubbish...no government can pass a law that is in violation of the present constitution and/or violates the "constitutional rights" of any citizen as entrenched in the said constitution...such a "law", if passed would be be "struck down by the courts" as being "unconstitutional"...period...???
...in effect, the constitution itself would have to be re-written(ever heard of constitutional reform...?)in order to alter or remove such rights, and that would be a challenge in Parliament, as it would require a "special majority" to get that passed in the house.
...it is really amazing as to figure out where some people get these illusions "masked as ideas" and where they came from...???
...An Extradition Treaty "CANNOT" be in violation of a persons constitutional rights, hence the very reason of today's court's decision which has ruled that the citizens rights are not violated by way of the said extradition treaty.[which country would sign away the constitutional rights of its citizens to another country...which democratically elected government, Prime Minister or President would do such a thing and survive, the United States of America...U.K, Canada, Australia...name one...???
...there are however, conditions which are attached to both the application of and the granting or agreeing to the "extradition request"...and that was not before the courts in the instant matter to be decided upon...it is only the constitutional motion which was decided upon and rendered, nothing else...???
...finally, this whole issue has got really lost and side tracked in a shuffle of race, politics, and a thorough lack of understanding of what this is all about by so many...???
...the denial of the constitutional rights of our citizens, the (mis)application of the rule of our laws in a fair and equitable manner, and natural justice being denied and manipulated by the prior government and its officials, charged with the responsibility to secure and preserve the said rights on behalf of the citizens...???
...what a shame, a colossal shame...both for the past government regime and to our country...for allowing this matter to be where it's at today...???
...no citizen's rights should be subjugated to the demands of another foreign state...especially when it was set up that way by the said government...intentionally...???
...get it right...!!!
...Pablo...!!!
It is STILL the same thing.
It is STILL the same thing. Constitutional rights can be signed away... by making it legal to do so. It so damn simple to see but when you only want to see what you wish to see, you will always have trouble comprehending anything. That is why they don't make any and everybody a judge - interpreting the simplest things does be BEYOND sycophants...
Examples: Every person has the constitutional right to Life, Liberty and Ownership... to name a few.
LIFE - The death penalty makes it legal to take away a person's constitutional right to LIFE
LIBERTY - A custodial sentence (jail time nah) makes it legal to take away a person's constitutional right to LIBERTY
OWNERSHIP - Forfeiture of assets makes it legal to take away a person's constitutional right to OWNERSHIP
All these constitutional rights are signed away when a government creates and passes laws into the lawbooks.
The ruling today proved that BECAUSE OF THE MARCH 4th 1996 EXTRADITION TREATY, THE RIGHT TO BE TRIED IN ONE'S HOME COUNTRY COULD BE LEGALLY SIGNED AWAY.
It couldn't be any simpler. Even a low grade moron like Free_Ish and all could understand it.
If you don't understand the
If you don't understand the difference between a "Treaty" which is negotiated and a "Law" which is statute...and non-negotiable, then you obviously have a real problem...so let me ask the question again, which democratic country in this free world has signed away the constitutional rights of it citizens...name one...???
...when one does not have an answer they to resort to name calling, which indicates that they obviously have a very limited vocabulary...and are often referred to as "slow learners"...or having "ADD"...go figure...eh...???
...Pablo...!!!
I just named one country for
I just named one country for you, the one in which you live. And I gave 3 examples and the reasons for their existence. Regardless of a "treaty" or "law", the bottom line remains the same. Under both, what was once enjoyed can be removed at the stroke of a pen.
If you have problems with the concepts, that is your own affair. How you feel personally about it won't make anyone give a damn.
And trouble yourself not about my vocabulary. You received some attention, be thankful for small mercies.
...yes Marchalis but it was
...yes Marchalis but it was your buddy Jeremie that watered it down...
what a babbling fool.
what a babbling fool. frothing at the mouth yet machineass? come on, bring it.
I have read today's
I have read today's comments, and realise something that I suspected on some days but can confirm today. Marchalis, whoever he is, deliberately posts comments to bat for a particular side. It doesn't seem that he is really discussing anything. He simply tries to skew the discussion. He either has a real stake in this trial, or he is being paid to be on here talking. This is so much B.S. Leave this for people who not out to create bacchanal, we just seeking clarity, and discussion. Marchalis just a political crony apparently with set written pieces to post. Ridiculous.
If you hate logic, say so.
If you hate logic, say so. -
Not that I give a rat's ass... newbie.
Come on AG these men are
Come on AG these men are only accused of bid-riging and should be tried locally. Which is worst spending 3 billion dollars of taxpayers money or bid-riging. Go after Manning, Rowley, Hart, Marlene, Hinds and Sewersingh. All thieves
who got rich of the citizens. By the way Kamla i see you are very lenient to those ex-pnm members who jump ship and willing to promote them to Mayor etc. What about the Magistrate who resign to run on a UNC ticket. This man needs a job or is it because you want to please the PNM, you are promoting those rats who fled the abandon ship. You don't have to kiss up because you are the majoroity now.
"Come on AG these men are
"Come on AG these men are only accused of bid-riging"
WOW!! And Trinidad & Tobago and the United States of America wasting precious time and money with these two fellas, when TOP LEGAL LUMINARY Persad has all the answers and knowledge of everything pertinent to this case. If the AG had consulted Persad, based on his vast knowledge of the case, this whole thing could have been sorted out and no UNC financiers would ever have to answer Federal charges.
Ish and his girlfriend Steve are wanted because of an indictment alleges that the Raul Gutierrez-owned Calmaquip Engineering Corp, a Miami-based firm (in other words AN AMERICAN COMPANY, SUBJECT TO FEDERAL AND TAX LAWS OF THE US), and others conspired to fraudulently win contracts for works on the $1.6 billion airport project, by arranging for shadow companies to submit falsely inflated bids, so that their own bids, also inflated, would be accepted. Any and all individuals named in the indictment would be answerable to AMERICAN law because regardless of where the crime was committed, AN AMERICAN COMPANY was involved which would have included issues with taxes among other things. And as everyone knows, the Americans don't make joke with their tax laws. The mistake these two crooks made was to use an American company, and THAT is why they have so much worry today. Ish and Steve never catered for getting caught, so now they have to answer... just as the others before them have answered.
Those are the facts about the case, and it has absolutely ZERO to do with what people like Persad want.
...John Jeremie couldn't
...John Jeremie couldn't have put this tissue of lies any better...you filthy bastards have tried to, and have ruined the lives and families of many innocent people just so that you and your buddies like Hart and Monteil et al. could rob us blind...tell Jeremie when you see him. that if the law don't get him, God will...in fact, they tell me She already has...
Here, look ah Kleenex...
Here, look ah Kleenex...