Judge to rule on TTRA injunction Monday

A HIGH COURT judge will rule on Monday on an injunction application to halt the operations of the TT Revenue Authority (TTRA), including the recruitment of staff.

On Friday, Justice Betsy Ann Lambert-Peterson reserved her ruling after hearing arguments for and against granting the injunction. Next Friday, she will set a timetable for the hearing of the substantive matter.

Initially, the judge had intended to give her ruling on the injunction immediately. However, she said she had to resile from that and would need time to consider the oral submissions advanced on Friday.

Customs officer Terrisa Dhoray filed the injunction application on May 8, to stop the implementation of section 18 of the TTRA Act, which deals with the enforcement division of the TTRA.

The application contends this forces employees at the Inland Revenue Division and the Customs and Excise Division, who are most affected, to decide by August 1 whether they want to join the TTRA.

Dhoray's challenge to the constitutionality of the TTRA was filed on July 19, 2022.

By legal notice on April 14, President Christine Kangaloo proclaimed certain sections of the TTRA with effect from May 1.

The injunction application seeks to have section 18 stayed pending the hearing and determination of the constitutional claim, as well as an order suspending the date of operationalisation of the TTRA.

On Friday, Dhoray’s attorney, Anand Ramlogan, SC, said the Government had the duty to uphold the rule of law. He said it was in the public interest to grant the injunction. Ramlogan also complained that the TTRA Act gave Finance Minister Colm Imbert too much power, making him a “puppet master.”

“They want to expose these officers to the political caprice and fancy of the political directorate.”

Ramlogan also complained about the authority going “full steam ahead” while the case was pending.

In response, Senior Counsel Douglas Mendes, who represents the Attorney General, urged the judge to dismiss the application.

He said the presumption of constitutionality mandates that the law must be followed until the court determines it should be set aside.

“The act is a law in force. They are asking the court to suspend the operation of an act.”

This, he maintained, should not be sanctioned by the court.

Mendes also said since the act allowed for the tax revenue collected to be put into the Consolidated Fund, one would expect the minister to have a degree of oversight.

“There is nothing unusual with the minister exercising a degree of control.”

He rubbished the contention that the TTRA would be collecting tax revenue illegally.

“So it is incorrect to say they are collecting taxes on their own behalf. They are collecting on behalf of the State. They are not creating taxes, they are collecting those taxes which the population will normally pay. There is no illegal collection of tax.”

Mendes also said that even if the act and section 18 were declared unconstitutional, it was unlikely the workers would suffer any prejudice, as they wouldrevert to their original positions and would lose nothing financially, as their remuneration was commensurate with their previous posts, while some were in receipt of better terms and conditions.

For those who chose to retire, he said they will be entitled to return to their positions, while the same would apply to those who chose to stay in the public service.

“They are asking you to stop or delay the collection of tax revenue,” Mendes submitted as he argued that the orders being sought were too wide. "Unless the court declares the act to be unconstitutional, then the authority should be allowed to do its job."

Appearing with Ramlogan are attorneys Jayanti Lutchmedial, Natasha Bisram, Kent Samlal, Vishaal Siewsarran and Robert Abdool-Mitchell.