TriniTuner.com | Latest Event:
Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
pugboy wrote:ever notice anand is always squinting when talking to the media ?
google "lying squinting"
White CZ4A wrote:Time to change ched subject to "will go free"
Volney/Crazy duet targetting 2013 Dimanche Gras stage
Published: Saturday, December 22, 2012
Kevon Felmine
Former Justice Minister Herbert Volney and calypsonian Crazy (Edwin Ayoung) have teamed up on the eccentric bard’s new song, The Fall Guy, based on the Section 34 controversy. The calypso will be launched at street parang fiesta, entitled Section 34, at 7 pm today, outside Volney’s Mt Lambert constituency office.
Volney is hoping the composition will take Crazy all the way to the Calypso Monarch finals. “I have a part in the tune,” he said, “In fact, we collaborated. He did the lyrics and I just spoke in the tune. His chorus is ‘I proclaim it, Aye Aye, I proclaim it.’ “The theme of the calypso is that I have nothing to be ashamed of over Section 34, its enactment and its proclamation. Who vex, ‘lorse’. That is exactly how I feel, of course,” said Volney.
The former minister has been working on today’s event for the past few weeks. Since his dismissal in September, he said, he has been busy in his constituency office. “Well, I am a full Member of Parliament. My time is currently being spent on the ground in my constituency like never before, and I am seeing first-hand what it is like to be a true Member of Parliament,” he said.
With the loss of his monthly income as a member of the cabinet, Volney said an MP’s salary cannot really sustain his livelihood. Luckily for him, he receives a monthly allowance from his judicial pension plan after serving as a judge for 16 years, to add to the $15,000 salary he is paid as MP for St Joseph.
Volney was dismissed by Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar for allegedly misleading the Parliament into believing that all consultations on the controversial Section 34 of the Adminstration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act had been completed before it was proclaimed. When asked in an interview yesterday if his MP’s salary was sufficient to support his needs, he said: “No! It is not, but fortunately I have a judge’s pension.
I earned my judge’s pension after working for 16 and a half years, and I don't maintain an affluent lifestyle. I live very humbly and I am able to get by.” Although he is not ashamed, Volney said he was hard-hit by his dismissal, as the Legal Profession Act 1986 prohibits a former permanent judge from practising for ten years after retirement.
However, he boasted that he is a resourceful man and has other options. “I am unemployable as an attorney but I can give legal advice. As far as I know, I can be legal adviser or legal consultant. I am still a lawyer by training but at this time I am fully employed in the service of the people of my St Joseph constituency. I could leave the country, but I don't think I can leave at this age when I have so much to offer.
“I am a very resourceful man and I am useful, not just locally. I offer services for criminal-justice transformation and creating strategic alliances, and it is available, but of course, at a price.” But as Volney now calls on Persad-Bissessar to reinstate him to his ministerial portfolio, he said the person who erred in the passing of Section 34 was Director of Public Prosecutions Roger Gaspard, who he said was guilty of malfeasance.
Volney said disciplinary action should be taken against Gaspard, starting with his being censured in Parliament.
“Any inaction you see, when you have a duty to act, and you don't, that to me is malfeasance. It is in that context that word is used, especially when you have a constitutional duty to safeguard public interest prosecutions, and in this particular case he knew the Piarco Airport public-interest prosecution would have been in jeopardy, unknown to me and the Attorney General.
“Rather than raise the red flag before it was late, he kept silent and opened his mouth after actions were filed or it was proclaimed. “I think first he should be censured in Parliament and then I’ll think of it, as a Member of Parliament, and then see how it could be done constitutionally,” said Volney.
http://guardian.co.tt/news/2012-12-22/v ... gras-stage
Trinidad Express Newspaper National News of Trinidad and Tobago wrote:
PM says no to max
President writes Kamla for answers on Section 34 but...
By Joel Julien joel.julien@trinidadexpress.com
Story Created: Dec 18, 2012 at 9:52 PM ECT
Story Updated: Dec 19, 2012 at 6:48 AM ECT
PRESIDENT George Maxwell Richards has called on Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar to provide information on the early proclamation of Section 34.
Richards, on December 7, wrote to Persad-Bissessar invoking Section 81 of the Trinidad and Tobago Constitution, calling for answers on the premature proclamation of the controversial law.
Section 34, which afforded accused persons with cases ten years old and over to walk free if their cases were not being heard, has since been repealed.
Opposition Leader Dr Keith Rowley yesterday made the disclosure as he held his final bi-weekly media conference for the year at his Charles Street, Port of Spain, office.
Rowley was notified of Richards' move on the Section 34 controversy in a letter from the President, also dated December 7.
Richards' letter to Rowley was in response to a letter signed by members of a "Roundtable" that called on him (Richards) to invoke Section 81 of the Constitution and compel Persad-Bissessar to account for the early proclamation of Section 34.
Section 81 of the Constitution states:
"The Prime Minister shall keep the President fully informed concerning the general conduct of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago and shall furnish the President with such information as he may request with respect to any particular matter relating to the Government of Trinidad and Tobago."
The Roundtable included Rowley, Joint Trade Union Movement (JTUM) leader Ancel Roget and Movement for Social Justice (MSJ) leader David Abdulah.
"With reference to the undated letter which I received on Tuesday, 20th November, which was signed by your good self and fourteen other persons representing various institutions, I wish to advise that by letter dated Friday, 7th December, 2012, I have written to the Honourable Prime Minister pursuant to Section 81 of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago," Richards' letter to Rowley stated.
Rowley described the situation as a "tremendous development".
"Section 81 affords the President the right to request from the Prime Minister any information on any aspect of the operations of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago," Rowley said.
"I think this is a tremendous development. It has never happened before, to the best of my knowledge in Trinidad and Tobago, where the President was requested in this way by the population, and he has deliberated. It is now for the Prime Minister to respond appropriately to the President," he said.
Rowley said he was now waiting to hear Persad-Bissessar's explanation for the fiasco.
"We had written to the President's Office about a number of concerns that we had relating to how Section 34 was pulled out and proclaimed and resulted in persons being able to evade their day in court, and we complained about the strangeness of the conduct of the Cabinet," Rowley said.
"We are hoping that we will get the answer now. Why was Clause 34 pulled out and proclaimed? We know what the effect was; we know a lot of how it was done; we have some information as to who was involved. We know it was done against the assurances given to the Parliament and so on, and the President was asked to find out from the head of the Cabinet, who under the Constitution is duty-bound to report to the President on any matter concerning the conduct of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago," he said.
"We will wait on the response from the Prime Minister, and we expect that the population would be appropriately advised," Rowley said.
In response to a September petition from Rowley, then acting President Timothy Hamel-Smith conducted his own investigation and deter- mined that former justice minister Herbert Volney was "responsible for matters relating to the passing and proclamation of the (Administration of Justice Indictable Proceedings) Act".
Rowley accused Hamel-Smith of using his role as acting President to be a rubber stamp for Persad-Bissessar in the Section 34 fiasco.
Volney was fired from the post of Justice Minister for misleading the Cabinet on Section 34 and was replaced by Christlyn Moore.
Trinidad Express Newspaper National News of Trinidad and Tobago wrote:I took action on issue already
Kamla responds:
By Anna Ramdass anna.ramdass@trinidadexpress.com
Story Created: Dec 18, 2012 at 9:52 PM ECT
Story Updated: Dec 19, 2012 at 7:06 AM ECT
Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar has responded to President George Maxwell Richards' written request for answers on the Section 34 fiasco, informing him that answers were already provided and action taken on the issue.
Persad-Bissessar yesterday confirmed she had sent a letter to the President in response to his letter dated December 7.
The Prime Minister did not divulge the content of her reply to Richards, but the Express understands the letter pointed out that Senate President Timothy Hamel-Smith had already conducted an investigation into the Section 34 debacle and had issued a full statement.
Section 34 of the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Bill 2011, which was prematurely proclaimed in August ahead of the majority of other sections, caused an uproar because it allowed businessmen Ishwar Galbaransingh, Steve Ferguson and other persons accused in the Piarco bid-rigging and corruption scandal to apply to the court to discharge their cases. The matter is now before the courts.
The Parliament immediately met and repealed the section.
The Prime Minister held former minister Herbert Volney accountable for the early proclamation and fired him.
Hamel-Smith, in response to a petition from Opposition Leader Dr Keith Rowley, had examined the matter and released a statement that Section 34 was "fundamentally flawed".
Hamel-Smith also noted that the section was repealed and Volney fired as he put forward a number of solutions aimed at improving the parliamentary system as parliamentarians had voted for the Act.
Sources told the Express that the Prime Minister's letter to the President noted Hamel-Smith's deliberations on the matter and stated the public's confidence in the Office of the President would be undermined to again raise questions on a matter that was already dealt with.
Sources also said the letter took issue with the President's interpretation of Section 81 of the Constitution, which states: "The Prime Minister shall keep the President fully informed concerning the general conduct of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago and shall furnish the President with such information as he may request with respect to any particular matter relating to the Government of Trinidad and Tobago."
According to sources, the letter pointed out to the President that Section 81 was not intended to give the President power to scrutinise every action taken by the Cabinet.
Last month, Attorney General Anand Ramlogan himself issued a release stating the President would be stepping out of his constitutional boundary if he were to use this section to seek answers on the Section 34 issue.
"It would be a misuse and flagrant abuse of Section 81 of the Constitution for his Excellency to institute a political probe or enquiry into the actions of the Government.... This is not the purpose, remit or function of Section 81, which is designed to keep the President informed," Ramlogan had stated.
Trinidad Express Newspaper National News of Trinidad and Tobago wrote:Volney: Probe will vindicate Govt, me
'DPPs role will be revealed'
By Joel Julien
Story Created: Dec 18, 2012 at 9:52 PM ECT
Story Updated: Dec 19, 2012 at 7:02 AM ECT
FORMER justice minister Herbert Volney says both he and the People's Partnership Government will be "totally vindicated" in the Section 34 fiasco.
However, he added that the "inaction" of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Roger Gaspard, will be highlighted when President George Maxwell Richards concludes his probe into the early proclamation of the controversial section.
An earlier investigation into the premature proclamation of Section 34 by acting President Timothy Hamel-Smith determined Volney was "responsible for matters relating to the passing and proclamation of the Act".
Volney was fired from the post of Justice Minister for misleading the Cabinet and was replaced by Christlyn Moore.
Asked to comment on the letter by Richards, Volney told the Express in a telephone interview yesterday:
"It will bring to the fore the inaction of the constitutional position of the Director of Public Prosecutions".
"The DPP has a constitutional duty to safeguard and to protect public interest prosecutions, and when the permanent secretary of the Ministry of Justice wrote him in February of this year in order to advise him that it was the intention of the ministry to proclaim the law, including Section 34, in June by mid-year and asked for an impacts assessment, a report on the impact Section 34 will have when proclaimed, he wrote back; he answered in May, saying that 47 persons would have benefitted," Volney said.
"In that 47 would have been the Piarco, the controversial ones; he did not at any time bring it to the attention either of the Attorney General or the Minister of Justice that if proclaimed, these prosecutions would have been affected, so he remained silent on it.
"He met me on no fewer than six occasions during that period and never brought it to my attention," he said.
Volney said Section 34 was proclaimed "timely" rather than early.
"When the law was eventually proclaimed, not early but timely, after that was done, he (Gaspard) then wrote a 19-page letter complaining," Volney said.
"Now, if he had done that one month before, this whole situation would not have arisen, and he refuses to answer the questions of why he sat on his laurels for nine months, and I have no doubt that the role of the DPP, through its inaction when he had a duty to act, will be uncovered, which is what I have been saying for some time," he said.
"It would be good if there is some time to probe because I know at the end of the probe, the Government, and that is including me at the time as part of the Government, will be totally vindicated," Volney said.
Case against repeal of Section 34 starts today
Published:
Monday, January 28, 2013
As Ish and Steve fight for freedom...
Ishwar Galbaransingh
Blackstone Chambers heavyweights Queen’s Counsel Michael Beloff and David Pannick will face off against each other today as businessmen Ishwar Galbaransingh and Steve Ferguson fight for their freedom. The two are challenging the repeal of the controversial Section 34 of the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act.
Lord Pannick and Beloff are both Oxford-educated and belong to the same chambers in London, but will be on different sides of the fence when the matter starts in the Port-of-Spain High Court before Justice Mira Dean-Amorer at 9.30 am.
They are among the five QCs who were flown in to T&T for the court matter, which is expected to continue throughout the week. Emotions are set to run high as relatives and friends of the businessmen and curious onlookers are expected to pack the courtroom to capacity in anticipation of the outcome.
The claimants—Galbaransingh, Ferguson and Maritime Life General Insurance Company and businessman Ameer Edoo—will be contending that they petitioned the court for freedom before the act was repealed in September last year. They are charged with committing fraud amounting to millions of dollars arising out of the Piarco Airport Enquiry.
The early proclamation of Section 34 of the act cleared the way for Galbaransingh and Ferguson, along with 47 others, to have court cases ten years and older dismissed. If the claimants are successful in their petition, charges arising out of the Piarco Airport scandal will be dropped.
Galbaransingh and Ferguson were first indicted in 2005 in a Miami federal court on numerous fraud and money-laundering charges stemming from alleged bid-rigging between 1996 and 2005 on contracts for the $1.6 billion Piarco International Airport expansion project.
However, the businessmen won their judicial review hearing against the decision by Ramlogan to sign extradition warrants against them on October 9, 2010. Justice Ronnie Boodoosingh ruled that the decision was “unjust and oppressive.” Ramlogan later said he would not pursue an appeal in the extradition of the businessmen because of the lengthy legal process involved and because they were expected to come to trial in T&T shortly.
The US Government openly expressed its displeasure over the turn of events, saying it was “disappointed by the outcome of the case.”
The Section 34 story
Section 34, controversially proclaimed on August 31, 2012—ahead of the rest of the act—would have allowed certain accused to walk free if their cases had not started within ten years of the commission of an offence. Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar called for an emergency sitting of the House of Representatives on September 13 for Section 34 to be repealed.
Persad-Bissessar blamed Justice Minister Herbert Volney for the fiasco and fired him from her Cabinet.
The legal teams
Leading the high-powered legal team for the claimants is Beloff, together with Edward Fitzgerald, QC, and Fyard Hosein, SC, who will be representing Ferguson and Maritime Life General Insurance Company. Galbaransingh will be represented by Andrew Mitchell, QC, while senior counsel Sophia Chote will appear for Edoo.
Appearing on behalf of the Attorney General will be Pannick, together with Allan Newman, QC, junior counsel Gerard Ramdeen and solicitor general Eleanor Joye Donaldson-Honeywell.
Other claimants
Petitions for freedom were also filed by former Airports Authority executive Amrith Maharaj and Maritime executives John Henry Smith and Barbara Gomes, as well as the company itself and Maritime Finance, Galbaransingh’s Northern Construction Ltd, Fidelity Finance Leasing Company Ltd, former finance minister Brian Kuei Tung, former works minister Carlos John, and former national security minister Russell Huggins.
These cases are expected to come up later this week.
pioneer wrote:I been saying this years now, nothing will EVER happen to Ish & Steve.
JUSTICE Mira Dean-Armorer this afternoon dismissed all the arguments raised by the Section 34 applicants, which include businessmen Ish Galbaransingh, Steve Ferguson, and Ameer Edoo.
She also refused to grant a stay of the criminal proceedings against the men, telling their lawyers to take their case before the Appeal Court.
The judge handed down her ruling in the Hall of Justice, Port of Spain, in a 175 page judgment.
- come back to this story for updates.
