Murkier and murkier

NOTWITHSTANDING attempts by Cabinet officials to clarify the matter, the activities of law enforcement authorities relating to firearms dealer Brent Thomas have become murkier.

The two separate interventions by Minister in the Office of the Prime Minister Stuart Young and Minister of National Security Fitzgerald Hinds have yielded only more questions.

Mr Young, in response to queries raised by Oropouche East MP Dr Roodal Moonilal during Friday’s motion of no-confidence against Mr Hinds, disclosed the aircraft used in the illegal abduction of Mr Thomas from Barbados last year was part of the Regional Security Services (RSS) fleet, which operates out of Barbados.

In a profoundly troubling ruling last week, Justice Devindra Rampersad not only found the repatriation of Mr Thomas unlawful, he stated the businessman was subject to “oppressive harassment.” He noted the claimant had described the airplane as being Defence Force-owned, but details were not forthcoming from police.

Did any official in the court case mention involvement of the RSS?

This apparent gap in the record is disturbing.

Also raising further questions is the fact that this country is not an official member of the RSS, though that would appear to be no impediment for Barbados to act in relation to an RSS asset.

Mr Hinds, in a separate televised statement on Monday, made no mention of the aircraft. However, he suggested the incident did not involve key officeholders.

“It had nothing to do with me as minister, the Prime Minister or the Cabinet,” he said. “It was police carrying out its police operations in the way it does.”

Yet so troubling are the facts that have emerged that Barbados authorities have taken note.

On Tuesday, newspapers in that country quoted Barbados Attorney General Dale Marshall as having requested a report from the country’s police commissioner.

It is evident that, given the ramifications for diplomatic relations between this country and Barbados, if the Cabinet was nowhere near this matter when it occurred last year, it certainly should be near it now. This, more so, given the purview of the National Security Council, a multi-sectoral body that comprises key Cabinet officials, including the PM.

Mr Hinds on Monday also advanced a distinction between police action and governmental action and said “lawyers for the State have been directed by the police to conduct an appeal” even as he also said “the AG is in the process of further investigating these matters to the extent that he can.”

The AG is clearly in charge of all litigation brought against the Government, so it is baffling to imply that lawyers for the State have been “directed” by the police to appeal.

That would be a breach of the very separation trumpeted by Mr Hinds on Monday.