San­gre Grande Re­gion­al Cor­po­ra­tion chair­man Ken­wyn Phillip has blamed claims of cor­rup­tion lev­elled against him on the elec­tion sea­son, as he de­nied any wrong­do­ing af­ter an email, from an anony­mous source, raised con­cerns of mis­con­duct with­in the cor­po­ra­tion.

The email named Phillip and two Unit­ed Na­tion­al Con­gress (UNC) coun­cil­lors in an al­leged scheme in­volv­ing tem­po­rary em­ploy­ment arrange­ments.

The UNC coun­cil­lors are ac­cused of ma­nip­u­lat­ing the sys­tem for per­son­al fi­nan­cial gain while vic­tim­is­ing hard­work­ing ac­tivists em­ployed with­in the cor­po­ra­tion.

The al­le­ga­tions sug­gest­ed that tem­po­rary em­ploy­ees—many of whom are UNC ac­tivists—are grant­ed short-term em­ploy­ment rang­ing from 10 to 20 days. How­ev­er, they are al­leged­ly co­erced in­to re­turn­ing a por­tion of their earn­ings un­der the pre­text of rais­ing funds for par­ty-re­lat­ed ac­tiv­i­ties, in­clud­ing ham­per dis­tri­b­u­tions.

The email had au­dio notes cre­at­ed by an ar­ti­fi­cial in­tel­li­gence source, claim­ing that those who fail to com­ply re­port­ed­ly face re­tal­i­a­tion, in­clud­ing the loss of fu­ture em­ploy­ment op­por­tu­ni­ties with­in the par­ty’s net­work.

But Phillip de­nied the al­le­ga­tions yes­ter­day. He said he had en­gaged the at­ten­tion of the po­lice to in­ves­ti­gate where and from whom the email orig­i­nat­ed.

He said the email has tar­nished both his name and his of­fice.

“This is the sil­ly sea­son, we ex­pect any­thing to come up. Again, I con­tin­ue to say that I have no knowl­edge of those things, and if you have any ev­i­dence of any wrong­do­ing, let us take it to the po­lice. I can­not say where it’s com­ing from, but this is not the first time an al­le­ga­tion like this has sur­faced. Again, I say, if they have any ev­i­dence of wrong­do­ing, let us take it to the po­lice,” Phillip said.

The au­thor of the email stat­ed that the al­le­ga­tions were be­ing made un­der the pro­vi­sions of the Whistle­blow­er Pro­tec­tion Act, 2024. The au­thor claimed an anony­mous re­port had been sub­mit­ted call­ing for an ur­gent in­ves­ti­ga­tion in­to the mat­ter.