Attorney General Anand Ramlogan on Wednesday denied a claim made in a newspaper article that he asked Gladys Gafoor to resign from the Integrity Commission. He also made it clear that he did not try to select Gafoor's legal team.
In a formal statement, he said: "The Attorney General specifically denies ever asking Mrs Gafoor to resign or attempting to select her legal team. This is obviously a matter of her personal judgement and discretion."
Ramlogan said he had to "clarify" his role in the impasse between Gafoor and the Integrity Commission and to "set the record straight" because of statements made by Gafoor claiming that Ramlogan offered to pay her legal fees but proposed English QC Michael Fordham and Gerald Ramdeen as instructing attorney for her in her case against the Integrity Commission.
Ramlogan said his discussions and advice in the matter were "legitimate" and "proper".
In a formal statement, he said: "The Attorney General specifically denies ever asking Mrs Gafoor to resign or attempting to select her legal team. This is obviously a matter of her personal judgement and discretion."
Ramlogan said he had to "clarify" his role in the impasse between Gafoor and the Integrity Commission and to "set the record straight" because of statements made by Gafoor claiming that Ramlogan offered to pay her legal fees but proposed English QC Michael Fordham and Gerald Ramdeen as instructing attorney for her in her case against the Integrity Commission.
Ramlogan said his discussions and advice in the matter were "legitimate" and "proper".
The Attorney General said that following an inquiry from Gafoor, he advised on the State's ability to pay legal fees in contemplated proceedings. He added that the discussions and advice in this regard were legitimate and proper and there is ample precedent and authority for same bearing in mind the constitutional role and function of the Office of the Attorney general.
Ramlogan said the facts and circumstances surrounding the allegations are the subject of a constitutional motion and a claim for judicial review where extensive and detailed evidence has been filed by all parties. "There is an application to strike out certain parts of Mrs Gafoor's evidence on the ground that it is scandalous and irrelevant," he added
"It would be improper for this matter to be ventilated in the public domain while the High Court is adjudicating on same. The Attorney General therefore does not propose to comment further on this matter as it is sub judice," Ramlogan said.
The AG also noted that the State is paying the legal fees for Gafoor to defend herself before the disciplinary tribunal and it stands by that commitment.
However he made it clear that the State is not paying Gafoor's legal bill challenging the President's decision to suspend her as deputy chairman of the Integrity Commission.
Ramlogan said the facts and circumstances surrounding the allegations are the subject of a constitutional motion and a claim for judicial review where extensive and detailed evidence has been filed by all parties. "There is an application to strike out certain parts of Mrs Gafoor's evidence on the ground that it is scandalous and irrelevant," he added
"It would be improper for this matter to be ventilated in the public domain while the High Court is adjudicating on same. The Attorney General therefore does not propose to comment further on this matter as it is sub judice," Ramlogan said.
The AG also noted that the State is paying the legal fees for Gafoor to defend herself before the disciplinary tribunal and it stands by that commitment.
However he made it clear that the State is not paying Gafoor's legal bill challenging the President's decision to suspend her as deputy chairman of the Integrity Commission.
No comments:
Post a Comment