Moonilal calls on Parliament's privileges committee to hold its hand

MP for Oropouche East  Roodal Moonilal.
MP for Oropouche East Roodal Moonilal.

ATTORNEYS representing Oropouche East MP Dr Roodal Moonilal have written to secretary to the Parliament’s privileges committee, Jacqui Sampson-Meiguel, advising that it would be “ill-advised” for the six-member committee to proceed with its inquiry today.

In a letter sent to Sampson-Meiguel early this morning, attorney Aaron Mahabir, of Veritas Chambers, suggested a stay of the proceedings of the committee until any police investigation into the matter is completed.

Mahabir said that would be the most prudent course to adopt in the interest of fairness.

The committee is expected to meet today to consider whether Moonilal was in contempt of the House of Representatives. He was referred to the committee on November 2, after House Speaker Bridgid Annisette-George ruled a strong case had been made out.

The grounds to be considered by the committee are that he willfully and intentionally mislead the House; that he made injurious allegations against the member of Diego Martin West when no substantive motion was before the House; and that he undermined the dignity of the House by abusing the privilege of freedom of speech.

He is challenging the committee on the basis of jurisdiction, bias of two members of the committee, and due process and protection of the law.

Mahabir said the committee had a duty to act fairly and Moonilal should be afforded the minimum level of procedural protection to ensure that the decision-making process was fair.

The lawyer said at the core of the duty to act fairly, was the duty of the committee to take all steps to ensure that Moonilal was given an effective opportunity to make representations before a decision is taken.

Mahabir said the matter which is to be investigated by the committee was reported to have attracted the attention of the police service.

“The possibility of a police investigation into this matter necessarily triggers the risk that any proceedings of the committee that will require my client to give evidence in rebuttal may result in this constitutional guarantee being infringed.

“Proceeding with this inquiry by the committee would in these circumstances be ill advised.

In those circumstances staying the proceedings of the committee until any police invetigation is completed would be the most prudent course to adopt.”

Mahabir asked for a reply from Sampson-Meiguel before the committee meets “to avoid the risk of suffering irreparable loss and damage” to his client.

Comments

"Moonilal calls on Parliament’s privileges committee to hold its hand"

More in this section