UDeCOTT says it just wants a fair deal from Uff probe

The Urban Development Corporation of Trinidad and Tobago (UDeCOTT) said Monday its decision to file for judicial review against the Uff Commission of Enquiry is not an attempt "to challenge or undermine" the Government's decision to establish the commission.

It's a climbdown from its original position of trying to stop the probe and expunge all material presented orally and in other forms to the commission.

Former cabinet minister Dr Keith Rowley called UDeCOTT's action an "outrage" and demanded government intervention, suggesting if the government failed to stop UDeCOTT it would be clear that it was complicit in trying to kill the probe.

Read the story: Rowley tells T&T government: Fire Hart, keep Uff probe alive

In a news release, the state company said it is only seeking to defend its right to be treated fairly and impartially by the inquiry, noting that it is the same right that any person or organization can exercise.

It noted that it is following a precedent set by Rowley in his action against the Integrity Commission.

Rowley sued the Integrity Commission in 2007 and won on the grounds that the Integrity Commission breached the principle of natural justice, acted in bad faith and was guilty of malfeasance in public office in its dealings with him.

Read the story: Court clears Rowley, awards $100,000

"Therefore, on Friday, 18th September 2009, UDeCOTT initiated a Judicial Review of the Commission of Enquiry seeking a declaration that the proceedings of the Commission of Enquiry have been vitiated by bias," the company stated.

If UDeCOTT wins a court could declare the proceedings of the Commission null and void and of no effect.

The inquiry is on hold because of the failure of the relevant government authorities to gazette it. The matter is now the subject of an inquiry headed by former Appeal Court Justice Anthony Lucky.

Attorney General John Jeremie has promised to introduce a validation bill to correct the problem and get the hearings back on track. But UDeCOTT's move could stall that and kill the proceedings.

"Having examined in detail the conduct of the Commission, UDeCOTT's legal counsel have advised that certain of the Commissioners have exhibited bias against UDeCOTT, such that UdeCOTT believes it has been deprived of a fair and impartial hearing," the release noted.

It added: "UDeCOTT is committed to a fair, transparent and unbiased review of its activities, as long as they are without political motivation, bias, prejudice and or a breach of UDeCOTT's constitutional rights."

UDeCOTT insisted that its quarrel is not with the establishment of the Commission of Enquiry but with the manner in which it has been conducted so far.

"Indeed, during the course of the Commission of Enquiry, UDecOTT has assisted and cooperated with the Commission in the discharge of its mandate," it said.

It said it is not challenging the actions taken by the State to validate the hearings and is simply pursuing a bias claim against the commissioners.