Appeal Court to rule on whether TSTT is a public authority

The Court of Appeal is expected to soon rule on the question of whether the Telecommunication Services of Trinidad and Tobago (TSTT) a public authority.

The expected ruling is part of an appeal by TSTT of a judge’s decision in which he declared the company a public authority within the meaning of the Freedom of Information Act.

On Friday, Justices of Appeal Alice Yorke-Soo Hon, Gregory Smith and Malcolm Holdip reserved their decision after asking the parties to send further submissions on issues raised during the virtual hearing, including on a recent gazetted announcement of the Cabinet’s appointment of the new chairman of the board and Government’s representatives.

In December 2018, Justice David Harris also declared that TSTT, as a “public authority” under the act, was subject to its provisions.

His declarations were made as he ruled in favour of a claim filed by social activist Ravi Balgobin-Maharaj who, two years earlier, unsuccessfully filed a freedom of information request to get information on TSTT’s executive management and their salaries; the stipend paid to directors; an unedited copy of the original shareholders' agreement between Cable and Wireless and TSTT and an unedited copy of the deed of adherence signed by the National Enterprises Ltd (NEL).

The judge had been asked to determine if TSTT was owned by or controlled by the State.

It was TSTT’s contention that the company was neither “owned” nor “controlled” by the State; was not supported by government funds and was not a public authority. Because of this, it argued it could not provide Balgobin-Maharaj with access to the information he requested. It also contended that TSTT was owned by NEL, a private limited company whose shares were substantially held by the Government.

In his order, Harris quashed TSTT’s decision to deny access to the documents requested by Balgobin-Maharaj and granted an order to compel the company to reconsider the request.

In his decision, the judge said he accepted the importance of the telecoms industry to the national good and the importance of a well-run and even regulated industry.

He also said the commercially competitive nature of the telecoms industry was not a relevant or weighty consideration for determining whether or not TSTT was a public authority nor was the potential for the erosion of its competitiveness by revealing commercially “industry-sensitive” information.

Harris said issues that “tread upon the sensitive commercial and competitive considerations” may be canvassed under the comprehensive exemption sections of the Act.

“Given the definition of a public authority in the Act and having regard to the object of the Act, the law, the symbiotic relationship between the TSTT, NEL and the Government of TT …and in the end the reality of GOTT’s de facto control of the affairs of TSTT, it would render TSTT a public authority under the FOI Act and subject it to the provisions therein,” he ruled.

TSTT’s appeal was argued by Senior Counsel Claude Denbow, Donna Denbow and Jerome Rajcoomar.

Balgobin-Maharaj was represented by Senior Counsel Anand Ramlogan, Jayanti Lutchmedial, Dr Che Dindial and Alana Rambarran.