Mark: AG Al Rawi has questions to answer

OPPOSITION senator Wade Mark is calling on Attorney General Faris Al Rawi to shed light on the claims made in an October 3 Newsday article, entitled: DPP in dark over deal signed between AG and state witness.

At a press conference at the Office of the Leader of the Opposition in Port of Spain on Sunday, Mark said he read the article with some degree of dismay and that it was a story that should concern every citizen.

Mark said he also received in his inbox, a copy of a document allegedly signed between Al Rawi and state witness Vincent Nelson in 2017.

Mark asked Al Rawi whether he could shed any light on the signed agreement he got in his mailbox and which was the subject of the Newsday article.

“We would like the Attorney General to clear the air on this matter…Has the Attorney General superseded and taken over the role of the police?

“Has the Attorney General superseded and taken over the role and functions of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)?”

He asked Al Rawi to confirm if it was his signature on the document. Mark said if this was true, then it would bring into sharp focus the issue of the separation of powers and whether or not the work of police and the Office of the DPP is being undermined.

The Sunday Newsday article stated: “Did Attorney General Faris Al Rawi agree to indemnify British Queen’s Counsel Vincent nelson from civil and criminal prosecution in return for a notarised statement and for Nelson to provide his personal ban records?

“According to a signed document, Al Rawi purportedly did so on behalf of the Government.”

In the article there are comments from both DPP Roger Gaspard, SC, and AG Al Rawi.

Gaspard was quoted in the article as saying that the only agreement he had with Nelson was the plea agreement relative to criminal proceedings against former attorney general Anand Ramlogan, SC, and former UNC senator Gerald Ramdeen.

The article quoted Al Rawi as saying, “Whilst it is public knowledge that there are criminal proceedings against Ramlogan and it is also public knowledge as to who some of the witnesses to those proceedings are, your message goes into a discussion on issues before the courts.

“In the circumstances, it would be unwise of me to engage in a discussion of this topic in public."