By Sue-Ann Wayow
AN attorney for Gary Griffith says the Police Service Commission (PolSC) has not complied with one of the terms of an agreement he entered into with it for him to act as commissioner of police (CoP).
This was stated by Griffith’s lead attorney Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, SC, when his judicial review matter came up for hearing before Justice Nadia Kangaloo on Monday.
This matter was joined with an interpretation summons filed by Ravi Balgobin Maharaj who is claiming that Griffith’s acting appointment as CoP was not properly done as per Parliamentary procedure.
Maharaj said he was not prepared to reveal the details of that particular item but he was willing to make it known to the court.
Griffith was also represented by Jagdeo Singh, Larry Lalla, Alvin Ramroop, Michael Rooplal, and Kristy Mohan while Russell Martineau, SC, Deborah Peake, SC, Ravi Heffes-Doon, Dominique Martineau and Savitri Sookraj-Beharry appeared for the PolSC.
Maharaj said, “We were hoping today to be able to tell the court that the matter was totally resolved.
“One of the terms of the settlement has not been complied with and based on that fact which is a very important term as far as my client is concerned, we will not be pursuing the application for the injunction; until that term is complied with, we will be pursuing the application for judicial review.”
He asked for adjournment of the application for leave for judicial review to the first week in November but Martineau indicated that he will not be in the country at that time and asked for a date in the second week instead.
Maharaj said the reason he asked for the November date was to allow for compliance with that term which has not yet been complied with. He said one of the terms was public knowledge, that is, that Griffith agreed to defer any duties as acting CoP until October 31 or until the investigation being undertaken by Justice Stanley John was completed.
Griffith’s three-year contract as top cop ended on August 17 and he was told by the PolSC to take administrative leave pending an investigation by retired Justice Stanley John into the firearms unit of the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service a month later.
Griffith had applied for an injunction to declare null and void the decision of the PolSC to send him on administration leave.
Martineau said that there was correspondence between the instructing attorneys for both parties regarding the settlement of the matter, terms and conditions which were initially deemed to be confidential but once a request was made by the court, they would be revealed to the court.
Last Tuesday, Justice Ricky Rahim gave both parties direction to file their respective affidavits. The matter has since been transferred from Justice Rahim to Justice Kangaloo.
Maharaj said, “We feel confident that this matter would be resolved. All we need is some time.”
Ravi Balgobin Maharaj’s matter takes precedence
However, in the matter involving Ravi Balgobin Maharaj, the court also agreed that his interpretation summons claim should receive precedence over Griffith’s matter.
The PolSC and Griffith are listed as interested parties in that matter.
Maharaj is being represented by attorney Anand Ramlogan, SC, who questioned the validity of the PolSC given that two members resigned recently and that the Commission was now inquorate with only its chairman Bliss Seepersad and attorney Roger Kawalsingh left as commissioners.
Attorney Rishi Dass is representing the Office of the Attorney General who is the defendant in Maharaj’s claim.
“In the eyes of the law, it simply does not exist and if it does not exist, then you cannot be suspended from an office that you do not hold or does not exist,” Ramlogan said.
Martineau replied, “The Commission is well established.”
Ramlogan also argued that given the public’s interest in the matter there can be no secret or private settlement between the two parties.
“It is simply not just a matter for the parties, but it is a matter for the public,” he said.
Martineau responded, “There is no question of any secret settlement and all sorts of constitutional points involved.”
He added, “There are no judicial review proceedings as yet.”
Although the two claims were separate, they were related and Ramlogan requested to be added as an interested party in the claim being made by Griffith to which Justice Kangaloo said the request will have to be made in writing.
The attorneys also requested copies of the court proceedings for the Griffith matter and courtesy copies were ordered to be supplied by Griffith’s attorneys.
Justice Kangaloo said Monday’s hearing was a “status hearing.”
The Court had ordered the submission of a statement of agreed facts with a deadline date of September 30 which remains.
Ramlogan said he already submitted his although the need for it was unnecessary because there were only three main facts.
The interpretation summons will come up for a Case Management Conference on Friday while Griffith’s judicial review application has been adjourned to November 10.
