By Prior Beharry
IS the support of the American Chamber of Commerce of Trinidad and Tobago (AMCHAM) for Eugene Tiah a case of classism or nepotism?
This is the question being asked by the United National Congress (UNC) after AMCHAM stated that it supported Tiah despite his withdrawal from a panel to investigate the death of four divers at a facility of the Paria Fuel Trading Company last month. The Opposition had taken issue with his appointment saying that he was represented in the court by attorney Stuart Young who is now the Minister of Energy.
In a release on Thursday, the UNC stated, “The UNC has no issue with any chamber or group supporting any individual or political party. We support democracy and free speech. Therefore, we have no issue with AMCHAM’s support of Mr Tiah. But in the same vein the UNC is also entitled to our non-support of Mr Tiah.
“In extremely poor taste AMCHAM used the cover of extending condolences, to instead mount a defence of Eugene Tiah.”
The UNC asked if Tiah was a working-class UNC or PNM member or supporter outside the circles of AMCHAM, if the chamber would have still supported him.
It asked, “Is their support of Mr Tiah a case of classism or outright nepotism?”
The UNC stated, “With regards to AMCHAM’s support of Mr Tiah, despite his history, the famous quote, ‘All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others,” is relevant more than ever.”
It stated that it had no issue with Tiah’s qualifications but it does not deem him reputable, credible or neutral regarding the investigation into the deaths of the four divers.
The UNC stated that this was not the first time that Tiah has found favour with the PNM.
It stated, “Mr Tiah enjoyed the confidence of a then-PNM administration wherein he was appointed as a director on ETeck. During his tenure, the Board of ETeck embarked on a very expensive investment in the amount of $35 million with Bamboo Investment. That $35 million left our shores without a single cent returned on the investment.
“The then-PP Government embarked on legal action to recover the investment by suing the then-directors of ETeck, including Mr Tiah who was named as the Fifth Defendant in the matter. The then-Board of ETeck, including Mr Tiah, was represented, inter alia, by Mr Stuart Young and Michael Quamina.
“The then-Board of ETeck including Mr Tiah attempted to avoid answering the direct questions as to why a decision was taken to invest $35 Million in Bamboo Investments without the necessary due diligence conducted on the company.
“Mr Tiah and the other Eteck board members lost their case all the way up to the Privy Council, with costs being awarded to the State in each stage of the matter. We wonder if Mr Tiah has to date paid the State the legal costs that the Courts ordered to be borne by him? ”
The party cited the words of Justice of Appeal Nolan Bereaux in delivering the appeal decision:
“It is a matter of great public notoriety that directorships in state enterprises in Trinidad and Tobago are much more a question of political patronage and cronyism than it is about competence and in which the lines between self-interest and the public interest can become blurred.”
The UNC noted that the appellate judge made no pronouncements on the characters of the directors of Eteck.
It stated, “It is hypocrisy that AMCHAM finds no issue with this imbroglio, but previously used very similar situations to call for persons to step down or removed.”
The UNC stated that it will say no more on this issue and hoped that Tiah and his supporters can now move on to more productive undertakings.
It stated, “We look forward to a cordial working relationship in the future with AMCHAM.”
