[UPDATED] Al-Rawi mum on Cabinet’s knowledge of indemnity deal

FORMER attorney general Faris Al-Rawi said since the related matters are still "under the watch" of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), he cannot say publicly whether the Prime Minister or the Cabinet approved an indemnity agreement for Jamaica-born King’s Counsel Vincent Nelson, which he signed in 2017.

Al-Rawi was speaking at a virtual press conference on Wednesday morning.

On Monday, DPP Roger Gaspard, SC, announced the State was discontinuing the charges against former attorney general Anand Ramlogan, SC, and former UNC senator Gerald Ramdeen.

The two were accused of collecting kickbacks from Nelson for state briefs.

The charges were dropped because Nelson, the main witness, refused to testify against them until the conclusion of a civil claim for breach of an indemnity agreement by the State.

However, Gaspard said the charges could be later reinstated depending on the result of the lawsuit.

The indemnity agreement included promises such as not disclosing the information to any criminal investigator, prosecuting authority, tax-enforcement authority or disciplinary authority outside TT.

Al-Rawi purportedly signed this on behalf of the Government.

On Tuesday, Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar asked whether Cabinet had approved the agreement, among other things.

She said if the Cabinet had approved the indemnity deal, “then the government lost all legitimacy and authority to remain in office.”

Asked about this, Al-Rawi said the matter of the Office of the Attorney General's position is "again, the subject of disclosure into the court.

"Agreements that come under the Office of the AG are under the Office of the AG. The Constitution sets that out in section 76 and 79 and the matters are carefully managed.

"I don't want to get into the details again, respectfully, because the matters are under the watch of the DPP and also in the civil proceedings."

He also sought to deny other "wild, unfounded and untrue" claims Persad-Bissessar made at her press conference by giving a timeline of events.

But he made it clear he could not go into detail about everything.

"I am bound to be very careful in what I say because the DPP has to have the independent right to consider a matter, being careful that as a witness in proceedings, that I do not overspeak the matter."

He said Persad-Bissessar is trying to "bait the government" to overspeak on the matter "to fall into a trap of undue publicity where attorneys can argue that their clients will not have a fair trial because there's too much information in the public domain.

"Therefore, I need to be careful in my regard for the law to allow the DPP his distance and to be mindful as a former AG and minister of legal affairs in this country, that the law always speaks and that the Privy Council's decision must be observed."

He said he spoke to Dr Rowley about the issue but "not in any detail."

He outlined the case from the confession to sentencing, adding that he gave four witness statements to the DPP "comprising (of) hundreds of pages."

He said Persad-Bissessar is "cherry picking bits and pieces of correspondence."

"I remind her there are hundreds of pages of witness statements from my hand alone – four of them – and that Mrs Persad-Bissessar's attempt to drop a piece here and a piece there out of context must be looked at with great suspicion."

He said Persad-Bissessar declared that she is "out to protect her members.

"She has declared that Mr Ramlogan is her AG and in her mind is the only person should occupy that office. She has a vested interest in recovering his reputation."

He said she "desperately wants" a get-out-of-jail-free card.

Asked by a reporter if he felt as if he "shot himself in the foot" by being involved in the indemnity agreement, he said he took the advice of senior counsel so he "does not feel one way or the other.

"Perhaps I should return the question by saying, 'What did you expect the State to do in the face of information?'"

And on Nelson's civil claim, Al-Rawi said the State's position is: "You can claim what you want – a claim is not an actuality.

"I can say very simply that the State's position is that that claim is bound to fail, and that is the advice coming from Mr (Douglas) Mendes (SC) and Mr (Gilbert) Peterson (SC).

Persad-Bissessar responded to his press conference on Wednesday afternoon in a press release, reiterating her calls for him to answer certain questions.

The questions included whether Rowley knew about the indemnity agreement, if it was discussed with any other government minister, among other things.

She said, "Today a shell-shocked former AG Faris Al-Rawi tried to wriggle out of the mess he had created in the Nelson fiasco. He unsuccessfully tried to defend the wicked and malicious persecution of political opponents at his press conference."

She said he "desperately evaded crucial questions, seeking refuge in adverse pretrial publicity for a case that now exists only in his imagination.

"How could there be adverse pretrial publicity when there is no case before the court?

"This entire scandal of political persecution reeks of a devious arrangement among senior PNM government officials, PNM-affiliated attorneys and a few PNM-affiliated public officials. It is only due to the decency and integrity of DPP Roger Gaspard that this devious persecution was confronted and stopped."

This story was originally published with the title "Al-Rawi: I can't say if Cabinet, PM approved indemnity agreement" and has been adjusted to include additional details. See original post below.

FORMER attorney general Faris Al-Rawi said since the related matters are still "under the watch" of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), he cannot say publicly whether the Prime Minister or the Cabinet approved an indemnity agreement for Jamaica-born King’s Counsel Vincent Nelson, which he signed off in 2017.

Al-Rawi was speaking at a virtual press conference on Wednesday morning.

On Monday, DPP Roger Gaspard, SC, announced the State was discontinuing the charges against former attorney general Anand Ramlogan, SC, and former UNC senator Gerald Ramdeen.

The two were accused of collecting kickbacks from Nelson.

The charges against Ramdeen and Ramlogan were dropped because Nelson, the main witness, refused to testify against them until the conclusion of a civil claim for breach of an indemnity agreement by the State.

The agreement included promises such as not disclosing the information to any criminal investigator, prosecuting authority, tax-enforcement authority or disciplinary authority outside TT.

Al-Rawi purportedly signed this on behalf of the Government.

On Tuesday, Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar asked whether Cabinet had approved the agreement.

She said, "This could hardly have been authorised by a sole minister. This cannot be just the attorney general on his own going off on a frolic...”

She said if the Cabinet had approved the indemnity deal, “then the government lost all legitimacy and authority to remain in office.”

Asked about this on Wednesday, Al-Rawi said the matter of the Office of the Attorney General's position is "again, the subject of disclosure into the court.

"Agreements that come under the Office of the AG are under the Office of the AG. The Constitution sets that out in section 76 and 79 and the matters are carefully managed.

"I don't want to get into the details again, respectfully, because the matters are under the watch of the DPP and also in the civil proceedings."