MP wants to enter new evidence in claim v parliament committee

OROPOUCHE East MP Dr Roodal Moonilal is seeking to amend his constitutional claim challenging Parliament’s Committee of Privileges to reflect what took place in the House of Representatives last Wednesday.

Last Wednesday, Moonilal was censured by the Lower House for failing to apologise for his alleged remark in October to Laventille West MP Fitzgerald Hinds, “Snake has lead for you.”

His claim, in which he is challenging the composition of the committee, came up for hearing before Justice Jacqueline Wilson in the Port of Spain High Court, on Monday, when she was expected to hear final submissions before giving her ruling.

The judge was told that before the hearing, Moonilal’s attorneys filed an additional affidavit to "bring the court up to date" on what transpired in the House of Representatives last Wednesday.

Moonilal’s lead attorney, Anand Ramlogan, SC, told the judge the purpose of filing the new affidavit was to “keep the court abreast of what was transpiring in the Parliament even while the matter was still before the court.”

But objecting to this was attorneys for the Attorney General and the Speaker of the House.

The AG’s lead attorney, Douglas Mendes, SC, and Senior Counsel Deborah Peake, who represents Speaker Brigid Annisette-George, questioned the relevance of the affidavit, arguing also that Ramlogan should instead have sought to amend the claim, and not file an additional affidavit.

They both asked the judge to reject the new evidence as well as any amendment to the claim, and only consider the evidence filed in February.

Peake argued that the decision to file the new document was a “tactical” move to bring in evidence without the Speaker or the AG being given an opportunity to respond.

In reply to the submissions, Wilson said she could not prevent Ramlogan from making an application to amend the claim, and has reserved her ruling.

After making the statement against Hinds, Moonilal was referred to the Privileges Committee by the Speaker. On February 4, he filed a constitutional motion claiming the committeehad infringed his constitutional right to a fair hearing; challenging the authority of the House to appoint temporary or substitute members to the committee; and seeking an injunction against the committee's continuing hearings.

He is seeking to have the court declare that the committee was in fact improperly constituted and its decision to meet and investigate allegations of contempt against him was invalid.

His attorneys are contending that the standing orders prescribe six members for such a committee, and secondly, that the Speaker and Hinds are members of the committee.

Moonilal claimed he did not wish to subject himself to the jurisdiction of a Committee of Privileges that was not properly constituted in accordance with the standing orders; that was biased against him and one which would not afford him a fair hearing and which would violate his fundamental rights to due process and natural justice.

After being censured in the Parliament, last week, Moonilal said his gagging was an attempt to silence him for the budget debate.