Legal Fees Dis-ease

My previous article gave two examples of the stance of our public officials on legal advice and legal fees. I also cited Dr Rowley’s statement to Parliament on 1 July 2016 which gave details of the $78.5M in legal fees spent at the Colman Enquiry into the collapse of CL Financial.

The details in the PM’s voluntary disclosure of those Colman Enquiry legal fees was contrasted with the plain reluctance of certain Public Officials to disclose similar details to me in relation to the CL Financial bailout. The evasions of the Ministry of Finance to resist my litigation were all taken under the advice of eminent Senior Counsel, no doubt highly-paid.

The central Republican value, has to be that none of us are lawfully entitled to the obscene privileges which prevailed in the bad old days. In fact, the distinctive thing about a Republic is that there are no more Earls, Lords, Ladies, Kings, Queens, Barons or Princes – save and except for Carnival Time. But those Republican ideals are being experienced in an individualistic and status-obsessed society. Continue reading “Legal Fees Dis-ease” →

World Press Freedom Day 2019

wpfd2019_web_global_english_800x416

…highlighting concerns that authorities and public servants in Trinidad and Tobago do not respect the rights of journalists…
—closing stanza of Reporters without Borders’ 2019 World Press Freedom Day webpage on T&T

This article was submitted on World Press Freedom Day 2019 – Friday 3 May 2019. This year, T&T is 39th out of 180 countries, placing our country well within the upper quartile in terms of standards of press freedom.

Freedom of the Press is an important constitutional right which must be balanced against rights to dignity. A considerable part of my work is in this arena, so I consider myself a member of the press, even if only as a part-timer.

In the last two days we have witnessed a political aspirant lose a defamation case against a businessman, with damages of $775,000 awarded by the High Court. More importantly, we have also seen the unprecedented arrest of a former AG, Anand Ramlogan SC and UNC Senator, attorney Gerald Ramdeen reportedly surrendering to the police. Both men are allegedly implicated in a series of transactions to receive rewards from legal fees paid by the State.

Issues of the established privileges of the legal profession are likely to gain centre-stage as these prosecutions unfold. Are legal fees to be set to a scale, with little scope for flexibility, or can those be simply ‘subject to negotiation’? Do lawyers’ offices possess a special immunity from police search or not? If that immunity can be pierced by a search warrant, how does that affect the presumption of lawyer-client privilege? Does lawyer-client privilege operate in the same way when the State is the client?

To show official stances on these issues across administrations, this week’s article examines the legal opinions relied upon by the State in the Invaders’ Bay episode and the legal fees paid in the CL Financial bailout.

Invaders’ Bay

In 2011, the Ministry of Planning & Sustainable Development advertised a request for proposals for development of Invaders’ Bay, which is a 70-acre parcel of reclaimed waterfront State land in west POS.

Several civil society groups protested that this process was a breach of the Central Tenders’ Board Act, which required Ministries to seek tenders via the CTB. The then Minister, Dr Bhoendradatt Tewarie, obtained legal advice which he claimed vindicated the Ministry’s procedures. The Minister refused to disclose that legal advice, citing legal professional privilege, which sparked the JCC’s litigation to obtain those opinions via the Freedom of Information Act (FoIA).

The JCC prevailed in the High Court on 14 July 2014 and the Ministry appealed. The Appeal Court gave its majority ruling on 28th October 2016 to order disclosure. The State indicated its intention to appeal to the Privy Council, given the potential impact of that Appeal Court ruling on the State’s ability to rely upon legal professional privilege.

Now I am reliably informed that the State has not filed an appeal and there is no such filing shown on the Privy Council website. The fact that the State has not filed an appeal must mean that the Appeal Court ruling stands, so when are those legal opinions to be published? I also think that the Appeal Court decision sets important limits on the State’s right to claim legal professional privilege as a way of concealing legal opinions in matters of high public interest.

Legal Fees in CL Financial bailout

On 1 July 2016, the PM, Dr Keith Rowley, made an important statement to Parliament giving details of the legal fees paid during the Colman Enquiry –

…Madam Speaker, as at May 2016, the total cost to taxpayers of Trinidad and Tobago of the Commission and the attorneys who were retained to assist in the Commission was $78,488,943.30 as of May 2016. There may be additional outstanding claims as indicated by some of the individuals involved. The fee breakdown as at May 2016 is as follows:
Shankar Bidaisee ………………………. $7,192,000.00
Gerald Ramdeen ………………………… $5,855,468.00
Varun Debideen ………………………… $4,955,000.00
Celeste Jules ……………………………….. $2,155,500.00
Israel B. Khan SC ……………………….. $989,000.00
Wayne Sturge …………………………….. $567,600.00
Lemuel Murphy …………………………. $250,000.00
Sir Anthony Colman QC …………….. $9,130,618.02
Peter Carter QC ………………………….. $23,393,808.54
International Limited ……………….. $2,712,213.48
Edwin Glasgow QC …………………….. $12,147,007.20
Ian Marshall ………………………………. $827,239.73
Marion Smith McGregor QC …….. $8,313,488.40
(pgs 36 & 37)

In April 2018, following my Appeal Court success, I requested the names, amounts paid and dates of payments to various professionals in the CL Financial bailout.

The Ministry refused to disclose those details, first citing a fear of crime, before going on to claim that if those details were published those firms and professionals would be reluctant to work for the State in the future.

I pointed out that the PM disclosed the names and amounts in July 2016, so the Ministry was invited to indicate what possible objection or change in circumstances could be cited in support of their refusal. In addition, given its sheer size, one can scarcely imagine that there are many firms or professionals able to decline work from the State.

The Ministry then attempted to invoke provisions of the FoIA related to disclosure of personal information which would allow affected parties 3 months to seek the protection of the High Court in cases where the decision was taken to publish those details. When I pointed out that the Act only creates those rights if the decision is taken to publish, the Ministry reversed its position by now deciding to publish. Please note, in the midst of all this emerging imbroglio about attorneys’ fees and advice, that the Ministry’s legal team was led by eminent Senior Counsel.

In our most recent court hearing, that eminent SC raised concerns on my continuing to comment on these issues while those were being litigated, using the sub-judice arguments and so on. Of course the Ministry recently sent me those requested details, since none of the affected parties/firms took the option to go to Court.

VIDEO: World Press Freedom Day Mid-Day lecture

My 2018 talk to the Guyana Press Association on World Press Freedom Day covered issues such as the special responsibilities of the Press, the Global Information War, the role of ‘FANG’, BREXIT and the election of US President Trump…all new ground for my public work…

AfraRaymond.net

gpa-wpfd-poster Afra Raymond was the guest speaker of the Guyana Press Association at its Mid-Day Lecture on Thursday 3 May 2018, at Moray House in Georgetown, Guyana on World Press Freedom Day. He spoke on the theme, “Keeping Power in Check: Media Justice and the Rule of Law.” Video courtesy Guyana Press Association.

Programme Date: 3 May 2018
Programme length: 00:40:00 and 00:19:53

View original post

Property Matters – Notes on Hotel sales

3hotels

This series on T&T’s State-owned hotels has shown the lack of transparency and accountability which is all too common in the other State-owned enterprises. These hotels are some of the largest Public Private Partnerships in which our Public Money is invested, so these are important in this era of declining energy revenues.

This article will examine the prospects for privatisation of those PPPs and make the link to the Tobago Sandals MoU.

Privatisations fit readily within the ambit of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Property Act.

In this period of ongoing budget deficits, it is likely that apart from ‘downsizing’, the government will have to consider disposing of various assets to raise cash and reduce its expenditure. That was the underlying rationale for the significant staff cuts at TSTT and the closure/restructuring of PETROTRIN.

The recent confirmation of taxes paid by the State-owned hotels was useful, but those taxes do not in any way represent a return on our heavy investments of Public Money. Continue reading “Property Matters – Notes on Hotel sales” →

Property Matters – The No Tell Hotel

What are the lessons learned in these examinations of the State-owned hotels in T&T? These are large-scale Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) and that approach is being increasingly adopted by our government in this period of deficit budgeting, so this review is a relevant one.
ppp

In this article I will set out the general arrangements, the T&T arrangements, the Tobago Sandals MoU and the closer examination of the State-owned hotels. Investment policy and the prospects for privatisation will be considered in conclusion. Continue reading “Property Matters – The No Tell Hotel” →

Property Matters – Anything for a Buck, part three

When I started this examination of the reported taxes paid by the e TecK hotels, it was with faint hopes of making any findings, given the erratic quality of the information provided by Minister Gopee-Scoon. Even the title ‘Anything for a Buck‘ was an attempt to make light of what seemed near impossible, picking sense from nonsense. But the humour soon vanished, just like the Buck, as I estimated the income and salaries for those hotels – Magdalena Grand and Hilton Trinidad.

hiltonpos In last week’s article, I estimated the sales and room revenues of those hotels, which showed that Hilton Trinidad’s Sales Revenue (estimated from its reported payments of Business Levy & Green Fund) was exceeded by its Room Revenue (estimated from its reported payments of Hotel Accommodation Tax). Sales Revenue is usually the sum of room revenue, food & beverage sales and other rentals for meetings/functions. That can only be described as an anomaly and one that requires a proper explanation, since it has a direct and adverse effect on the Rental payable to e TecK by Hilton Trinidad under the terms of its Management Agreement. That Management Agreement was registered as a Lease on 7th July 2006.

Last week I also made the point that there was not enough information to reliably estimate costs, other than salaries, from the taxes paid. This week, I will delve into the implications of the salaries by using the reported payments of NIS contributions and PAYE. Given that Magdalena Grand has no reported PAYE, according to the Minister’s statement on 19th March 2019, it is not possible to compare that hotel with Hilton Trinidad on all bases. Continue reading “Property Matters – Anything for a Buck, part three” →

Property Matters – Anything for a Buck part two

The previous article started by dealing with the Buck and his alleged stealing. This week I will be examining, at last, just where does the Buck pass. For those readers who may be smiling, this is no jokey thing. In this article I will be looking at that thing and its meaning.

Minister Gopee-Scoon’s delivery on Tuesday, 19 March 2019 in the Senate was nothing less than a ‘Phantom Presentation‘. (See video below, begins at 29:35) All part of the ‘hop skip and jump’ between wanting to appear to disclose but not really telling the public the real story. Like the olden Primary School days when as children we used to play ‘Hide and Seek‘, with the one who could hide the best as the winner, along with ‘Catch‘, with the one who could run the fastest and twist suddenly being impossible to catch. You see? I am going to explain all that now.

As noted last week, Senator Obika’s queried ‘taxes and dividends collected‘ for the two Eteck hotels in the period 2015 to 2018. Continue reading “Property Matters – Anything for a Buck part two” →

Property Matters – Anything for a Buck

This title reflects the negotiating stance of our governments in these massive State-owned hotels as I wonder at the convenient distraction of the ‘Buck’ emerging from folklore into the modern media. A shadowy figure who is eating-out the family’s food, coming and going as they please, people have to tie-down their things but those could still go missing. No broken windows or forced locks, so somebody is letting the Buck in, like some kind of secret love affair. Well I tell you.

In this article, I will set out the recent disclosures by Minister of Trade and Industry, Senator Paula Gopee-Scoon, on Hilton Trinidad & Conference Centre and Magdalena Grand.

scoon-obika On Tuesday 19th March 2019, the Minister of Trade and Industry replied in Senate to two questions by UNC Senator Taharqa Obika –

“…Can the Minister advise as to the amount of taxes and dividends collected from the Magdalena Grand Hotel for each year during the period 2015 to 2018?…”

The second question sought the same details for Hilton Trinidad & Conference Centre. Continue reading “Property Matters – Anything for a Buck” →

Property Matters – Sandals Shuffle

“…we are running a Country, not a Company…”
—Mia Mottley QC MP, Barbados PM – from her inaugural budget Wednesday, 20 March 2019

This title occurred to me due to the quiet backsliding of the main supporters of the Tobago Sandals project. This is the kind of situation where people thought they were operating safely in the dark, until someone suddenly opens the door and turns on the lights. The emergence of Sandals’ recent skirmishes have also reminded me of a shuffle.

Those shameless promoters told the public repeatedly about how satisfactory the existing arrangements were for State-owned hotels and went on to explain the special benefits of Sandals and so on and so forth. The steady exposure of the rickety arrangements for the existing hotels and the publication of the Tobago Sandals MoU have combined to end the scheme. Sunlight is really the best disinfectant. Continue reading “Property Matters – Sandals Shuffle” →

CL Financial bailout – A Matter of Interest

The matter of interest is at the very centre of the collapse of CL Financial and the subsequent $25 Billion bailout, which has been conducted on terms deeply inimical to the Public Interest.

The mis-match between the high cost of CLF’s borrowings and the low return on its varied investments caused that group’s collapse. The bailout was agreed to commit an undefined quantity of scarce Public Money to rescue those investors at the riskiest end of the financial market, most of whom had invested in short-term Annuities. Of course the Executive Flexible Premium Annuity (EFPA) was an insurance product approved as required by law, it would be untrue to attach any other meaning to those investments which we now know to have totalled about $11 Billion. I have always thought of Annuities as long-term investment products in the 15-20 year range, but CLF redefined terms we had thought were settled.

But the bailout itself, apart from refunding the capital of those riskiest of investors, went several steps further – Continue reading “CL Financial bailout – A Matter of Interest” →