Senior Reporter
derek.achong@guardian.co.tt
The trial of King’s Counsel Vincent Nelson’s multi-million dollar lawsuit over the Government’s alleged breach of an indemnity agreement related to his role as the State’s main witness in the now-discontinued corruption case against former attorney general Anand Ramlogan, SC, and attorney Gerald Ramdeen, has commenced.
The trial kicked off before High Court Judge Jacqueline Wilson at the Waterfront Judicial Centre yesterday morning.
Members of the media are not permitted to attend the trial as it is being held in-camera.
When the case was first filed by Nelson, his then attorney applied for it to be sealed. Nelson subsequently changed his legal team and sought to reverse the publicity bar on the case as he claimed he had never instructed that it be sealed.
However, the Attorney General’s Office resisted the move as it claimed there is an overlap between the civil case and the criminal proceedings against the duo which may be reinstituted by Gaspard after the civil case is determined.
Justice Wilson eventually agreed to leave the case sealed.
In 2019, Ramlogan, Ramdeen, and Nelson were charged over an alleged legal fee kickback scheme. They were jointly accused of conspiring together to receive, conceal and transfer criminal property namely the rewards given to Ramlogan by Nelson for being appointed to represent the State in several cases; conspiring to corruptly give Ramlogan a percentage of the funds and conspiring to make Ramlogan misbehave in public office by receiving the funds.
Shortly after being charged, Nelson entered into a plea agreement with the DPP’s Office in exchange for his testimony against Ramlogan and Ramdeen.
In March 2020, High Court Judge Malcolm Holdip upheld the plea agreement and issued a total of $2.25 million in fines to Nelson for his role in the alleged conspiracy.
Under his plea agreement, the conspiracy to commit misbehaviour in public office charge was dropped and he was fined for the other two offences.
In 2022, Nelson filed a lawsuit seeking almost $100 million in compensation for alleged multiple breaches of the agreement with the State.
Under the agreement, former attorney general and current Local Government Minister Faris Al-Rawi, as legal representative of the Government, agreed that Nelson’s statement, which was used to initiate the investigation into the duo, would not be released into the public domain, including through parliamentary debate.
While it stated that the statement would be disclosed to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the Anti-Corruption Investigation Bureau (ACIB), it noted it would not be disclosed to prosecuting, tax enforcement, regulatory or disciplinary authorities outside of T&T. It also promised that no civil litigation to recoup fees paid to him would be taken against him about the statement.
Al-Rawi agreed to make representations to the DPP’s Office for him not to be prosecuted. The agreement also sought to indemnify Nelson from any litigation over the allegations contained in the statement, which it acknowledged may be challenged for defamation.
Nelson alleged that Government Minister Stuart Young breached the agreement by providing it to the United Kingdom’s National Crime Agency (NCA). At the time, Young admitted that he did supply the statement to the NCA but denied any wrongdoing.
Al-Rawi also denied any wrongdoing with the indemnity agreement as he claimed it was done on the advice of Senior Counsel Douglas Mendes and Gilbert Peterson who were initially retained to defend Nelson’s civil lawsuit but were eventually replaced.
The trial is scheduled to continue today.