JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Sunday, March 30, 2025

EOT ordered to reinstate Veera Bhajan

by

31 days ago
20250227
Veera Bhajan

Veera Bhajan

At­tor­ney Veera Bha­jan is to be im­me­di­ate­ly re­in­stat­ed to her po­si­tion as a lay as­ses­sor in the Equal Op­por­tu­ni­ty Tri­bunal (EOT) af­ter the Court of Ap­peal ruled in her favour and dis­missed the ap­peal brought by Don­na Prow­ell-Raphael, chair­man of the Equal Op­por­tu­ni­ty Tri­bunal.

The judges up­held the High Court’s de­ci­sion that Bha­jan was wrong­ful­ly pre­vent­ed from as­sum­ing her role as a lay-as­ses­sor at the tri­bunal and ruled that the chair­man act­ed out­side her au­thor­i­ty. The court found that Bha­jan was valid­ly ap­point­ed and that the chair­man had no au­thor­i­ty to block her ap­point­ment. The judges agreed that the chair­man’s ac­tions were il­le­gal, an abuse of pow­er, and con­trary to the Equal Op­por­tu­ni­ty Act.

The court re­ject­ed the chair­man’s claim that the High Court judge showed bias, say­ing: “Strong lan­guage used in the judg­ment does not nec­es­sar­i­ly trans­late in­to ac­tu­al bias.”

The on­ly as­pect of the High Court rul­ing that was mod­i­fied was the re­moval of le­git­i­mate ex­pec­ta­tion as a ground for re­lief.

In No­vem­ber 2021, Pres­i­dent Paula-Mae Weekes ap­point­ed Veera Bha­jan as a lay-as­ses­sor at the Equal Op­por­tu­ni­ty Tri­bunal (EOT). Lay-as­ses­sors as­sist the tri­bunal in ad­ju­di­cat­ing dis­crim­i­na­tion cas­es.

Don­na Prow­ell-Raphael, the tri­bunal’s chair­man, re­fused to fa­cil­i­tate Bha­jan’s ap­point­ment, claim­ing that the tri­bunal did not have the re­sources to ac­com­mo­date her.

The chair­man al­so ques­tioned whether Bha­jan met the nec­es­sary qual­i­fi­ca­tions, ar­gu­ing that she had not yet served ten years as an at­tor­ney.

In De­cem­ber 2021, the Pres­i­dent amend­ed Bha­jan’s ap­point­ment, ex­plic­it­ly in­clud­ing her le­gal and so­cial wel­fare ex­pe­ri­ence as part of her qual­i­fi­ca­tions.

De­spite this clar­i­fi­ca­tion, the chair­man still re­fused to al­low Bha­jan to take up her po­si­tion.

In the rul­ing, the court award­ed Bha­jan $185,000 in dam­ages and or­dered the tri­bunal to fa­cil­i­tate her ap­point­ment.

Bha­jan was rep­re­sent­ed by Ra­jiv Chaitoo.

In a re­sponse to Guardian Me­dia, Bha­jan said she was still pro­cess­ing the judg­ment. On a Face­book post she said, “A seem­ing­ly nev­er-end­ing jour­ney which I was des­tined to walk. Some days I walked in fear, sad­ness, anx­i­ety, shame. Oth­er days I walked with re­silience, strength, grace. Both days I kept walk­ing, trust­ing that I was nev­er alone on this jour­ney.”


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored