And they have also agreed that the IC chairman acted with bias when he said the Prime Minister could have avoided the controversy over where she stayed after her election by going to a hotel instead.
Opposition Leader Keith Rowley has referred Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar to the IC for failing to declare her stay at a private home in Tunapuna as a gift.
Ramlogan told reporters at the regular post-cabinet briefing that he consulted four eminent Senior Counsel on the matter: former President of the Law Association, Martin Daly; a former PNM Attorney General, Russel Martineau; British Senior Counsel, Alan Newman; and Sir Fenton Ramsahoye of Guyana.
Ramlogan said he asked them five questions:
- Is the stay of the Honourable Prime Minister at the residence of her personal friends, a gift within the meaning of the Integrity of Public Life Act?
- Is it a matter she ought to disclose in her annual declaration of assets, income and liabilities to the Integrity Commission?
- Does the fact that the Prime Minister stayed at the Gopauls' residence bar Gopaul and Company Ltd from tendering from work in the public sector?
- If the company does tender for such work, does the personal relationship with the Prime Minister create any conflict of interest that must be disclosed? If so, in what circumstances, and how should that conflict of interest be disclosed and dealt with?
- In light of the comments made by Eric St Cyr, the Chairman of the Integrity Commission, that the Prime Minister should have stayed at a hotel and not at the residence of the Gopaul family, is he now disqualified from investigating this complaint made against the PM, on the grounds of apparent bias?
He quoted from the responses:
Martin Daly 's response: "No transfer of the Gopaul property was made, nor was any enforcible right to it given to the Prime Minister.
"For that reason, her use of it does not constitute a gift within the meaning of the law. It would be different of course if the Gopauls had given her a lease or license to occupy the property."
Senior Counsel Alan Newman: "The words 'fee,' 'gift' or 'personal benefit' must be construed in terms of the mischief which the Act intends to prevent. Which is the receipt of something tangible or of value to the recipient such as money or an object of value, or service of value.
"Staying for a while in the house of a longstanding friend, because of its convenient location, would hardly seem to be within the purpose of the Act."
Senior Counsel Russel Martineau: "In my opinion, it is not for the company to make any disclosure of their friendship with the Prime Minister. They may do so, but 'not must' do so.
"It is for those responsible for the tendering process to disclose any friendships they may have with the company or its principals...The question of the disclosure of the friendship by the Prime Minister or the company raises other kinds of problems. If it is disclosed, it may be seen as an attempt to influence persons involved in the tendering process."
Sir Fenton Ramsahoye also reported that there was no violation under the Integrity in Public Life Act, Ramlogan said.
He also confirmed that the SCs found that the IC Chairman Eric St Cyr acted with bias when he gave his personal opinion that the Prime Minister should have stayed at a hotel and not at the residence of the Gopaul family during and after the 2010 election.
He said Daly stated: "I am satisfied that any court, putting itself in the position of the fair-minded observer would conclude that there is bias, in law, on the part of the Chairman of the Integrity Commission.
"In those circumstances, the Chairman would recuse himself from taking part in any complaint against the Prime Minister."
British Senior Counsel Alan Newman agreed: "The Chairman of the Integrity Commission has entered into the fray and given the impression that he has formed a preliminary view that is adverse to the Prime Minister.
"In my view, applying the law, the Chairman has given the clear appearance of bias and must recuse himself."
Senior Counsel Russel Martineau: "In my opinion, it is not for the company to make any disclosure of their friendship with the Prime Minister. They may do so, but 'not must' do so.
"It is for those responsible for the tendering process to disclose any friendships they may have with the company or its principals...The question of the disclosure of the friendship by the Prime Minister or the company raises other kinds of problems. If it is disclosed, it may be seen as an attempt to influence persons involved in the tendering process."
Sir Fenton Ramsahoye also reported that there was no violation under the Integrity in Public Life Act, Ramlogan said.
He also confirmed that the SCs found that the IC Chairman Eric St Cyr acted with bias when he gave his personal opinion that the Prime Minister should have stayed at a hotel and not at the residence of the Gopaul family during and after the 2010 election.
He said Daly stated: "I am satisfied that any court, putting itself in the position of the fair-minded observer would conclude that there is bias, in law, on the part of the Chairman of the Integrity Commission.
"In those circumstances, the Chairman would recuse himself from taking part in any complaint against the Prime Minister."
British Senior Counsel Alan Newman agreed: "The Chairman of the Integrity Commission has entered into the fray and given the impression that he has formed a preliminary view that is adverse to the Prime Minister.
"In my view, applying the law, the Chairman has given the clear appearance of bias and must recuse himself."
No comments:
Post a Comment