Derek Achong

Se­nior Re­porter

derek.achong@guardian.co.tt

The State has been or­dered to pay more than $1.6 mil­lion in com­pen­sa­tion to for­mer Equal Op­por­tu­ni­ty Com­mis­sion (EOC) chief ex­ec­u­tive De­van­ty Maraj-Ramdeen for fail­ing to give her a prop­er op­por­tu­ni­ty to earn a re­new­al of her con­tract.

In Oc­to­ber 2022, High Court Judge Joan Charles par­tial­ly up­held Maraj-Ramdeen’s case over not re­ceiv­ing a re­new­al when her three-year con­tract came to an end in 2021.

While her ju­di­cial re­view law­suit, in which she al­leged that for­mer at­tor­ney gen­er­al Faris Al-Rawi act­ed un­law­ful­ly in not ap­prov­ing the re­new­al of her con­tract was dis­missed, Jus­tice Charles ruled that the Of­fice of the At­tor­ney Gen­er­al and the Min­istry of Le­gal Af­fairs (OAGM­LA) breached Maraj-Ramdeen’s con­sti­tu­tion­al right to pro­tec­tion of the law by fail­ing to con­sult with her when the de­ci­sion was tak­en not to re­new her con­tract and ad­ver­tise the po­si­tion.

Last week, Jus­tice Charles as­sessed the com­pen­sa­tion that should be paid to Maraj-Ramdeen.

She was award­ed $1.3 mil­lion based on the salary she missed out on re­ceiv­ing and $200,000 in vin­di­ca­to­ry dam­ages to high­light the con­sti­tu­tion­al breach in her case.

Jus­tice Charles al­so or­dered $100,000 in com­pen­sa­tion for the emo­tion­al dis­tress Maraj-Ramdeen en­dured.

“The bla­tant un­fair­ness met­ed out to her in fail­ing to give her an op­por­tu­ni­ty to ad­dress con­cerns they might have had about her per­for­mance, or to dis­cuss the de­ci­sion it­self with her, giv­en her ex­em­plary per­for­mance in the post, on­ly added to the hurt and em­bar­rass­ment she ex­pe­ri­enced,” Jus­tice Charles said.

“The claimant was hu­mil­i­at­ed be­fore her ju­niors when her post was ad­ver­tised and she had to give them di­rec­tions re­gard­ing the steps to be tak­en to re­move her from the Com­mis­sion’s sys­tems,” she added.

Ac­cord­ing to the ev­i­dence, Maraj-Ramdeen was first ap­point­ed in De­cem­ber 2011 and re­ceived two suc­ces­sive three-year con­tract re­newals.

In Oc­to­ber 2020, be­fore her third con­tract was due to end, Maraj-Ramdeen ex­pressed in­ter­est in serv­ing an­oth­er term.

EOC Chair­man Ian Roach did her per­for­mance ap­praisal and adopt­ed the as­sess­ment con­duct­ed by his pre­de­ces­sor as he had on­ly been ap­point­ed five months pri­or. He al­so rec­om­mend­ed that her con­tract be re­newed.

How­ev­er, she was in­formed that the re­new­al was not ap­proved by Al-Rawi and she should reap­ply for the post.

In de­ter­min­ing the case, Jus­tice Charles re­ferred to the EOC’s pol­i­cy man­u­al for the re­new­al of con­tracts of em­ploy­ment.

Un­der the pol­i­cy, the CEO is re­quired to ex­press in­ter­est in a re­new­al be­fore be­ing as­sessed by the EOC’s Board of Com­mis­sion­ers.

If the board sup­ports the re­new­al, that is com­mu­ni­cat­ed to the min­istry for the ap­proval of the At­tor­ney Gen­er­al. If the re­new­al re­quest is re­ject­ed, the board is re­quired to com­mu­ni­cate the de­ci­sion and give rea­sons.

Jus­tice Charles not­ed that the re­new­al rec­om­men­da­tion was made by Roach and not by the board as re­quired.

She stat­ed that since the board did not make the rec­om­men­da­tion, Al-Rawi could not be ac­cused of usurp­ing the EOC’s re­mit by re­fus­ing to re­new Maraj-Ramdeen’s con­tract.

“In light of my find­ings above, I al­so hold that the de­ci­sion was nei­ther unau­tho­rised nor con­trary to law,” Jus­tice Charles said.

De­spite her sub­stan­tive find­ings, Jus­tice Charles main­tained that Maraj-Ramdeen should have been al­lowed to re­spond to the de­ci­sion.

“The claimant was the in­cum­bent, hold­ing a very se­nior man­age­r­i­al po­si­tion with the Com­mis­sion; she ought to have been giv­en the op­por­tu­ni­ty to ad­vance rea­sons why the po­si­tion should not be ad­ver­tised, and why, in the in­ter­est of the good ad­min­is­tra­tion of the EOC, con­ti­nu­ity of the in­cum­bent was ad­van­ta­geous to the smooth op­er­a­tion of the EOC,” she said.

Maraj-Ramdeen was rep­re­sent­ed by Anand Ram­lo­gan, SC, Renu­ka Ramb­ha­jan, Jayan­ti Lutch­me­di­al, and Alana Ram­baran.

The EOC was rep­re­sent­ed by Rus­sell Mar­tineau, SC, Do­minique Mar­tineau, and Mar­celle Fer­di­nand.