Integrity body clears PM again in Tobago townhouse purchase

YET again, the Integrity Commission is standing by its decision to bring to an end the probe, into the Prime Minister’s purchase of a townhouse in Tobago.

The commission has said, Dr Rowley omitted to disclose the purchase contrary to the Integrity in Public Life Act.

But it also added that Dr Rowley’s omission was not deliberate.

It maintained its position that it could not find reasonable grounds to draw the inference that Dr Rowley made a false statement of the estimated value of the townhouse in his Form A declaration of income, assets and liabilities.

However, the commission said it has asked Dr Rowley to amend his declaration to reflect the true state of his affairs.

On Thursday, the commission maintained it conducted a “meaningful investigation” of the complaint first raised in December 2021 by UNC MP Saddam Hosein over the purchase of the townhouse at Inez Gate at Shirvan, Tobago.

It also said enquiries were made of relevant witnesses. The commission was responding to a second call by UNC activist Ravi Balgobin Maharaj to reopen its investigation into the Prime Minister’s declaration of the purchase of the Tobago townhouse to consider the valuation of the townhouse.

On Thursday, the commission wrote to Maharaj’s attorney Vishaal Siewsaran in response to the request to reopen its investigation, interview relevant people, obtain documentary evidence and make a fresh decision.

In the second complaint, on August 17, Siewsaran took issue with the value Dr Rowley ascribed to the townhouse in his declaration of income and assets under the Integrity in Public Life Act (IPLA).

The attorney argued that the commission’s original 18-month investigation was done in a “piecemeal manner,” and was “skewed, biased, and incomplete.”

Maharaj first challenged the commission’s decision to terminate its investigation on August 3.

In the request to re-open the investigation, Siewsaran said when Dr Rowley and his wife signed the deed for the purchase price of $1.2 million, they would have been expected to pay stamp duty on that figure, and the attorney who acted for them would have had to present a valuation report to pay the stamp duty.

“It is clear that the BIR became suspicious of this transaction and hence commissioned an independent valuation from the Valuations Division,” which, he said, valued the townhouse at $1.68 million, not $1.2 million.

The commission said it found “no evidence of any alteration from a lower stamp value to a higher stamp value to raise an inference that there was a change in the circumstances which was so significant that Dr Rowley had to be made aware of same.

“Additionally, the commission reiterates that it had no evidence suggesting that Dr Rowley knew of the valuation of the said townhouse unit for stamp duty purposes.”

“The commission is compelled to point out that what ought to have been done by the attorney responsible for the transaction and what was actually done are two distinct matters.

“In this regard, the commission is required to make its decision based on evidence.

“Certainly Dr Rowley may have been informed of the stamp duty which he was required to pay in the sum of $33,500. However, based on the evidence obtained during the course of the commission’s investigation, there was no indication that a valuation report was submitted to the Inland Revenue Division as regards the transaction.”

It also said it considered obtaining further evidence on the transaction. However, it determined that any communication between Dr Rowley and his attorney would have been privileged.

On August 20, the attorney who registered the deed for the Prime Minister’s Tobago townhouse responded to Newsday’s questions on the transaction.

Attorney Colvin Blaize was asked if the stamp duty paid was based on the value of the townhouse stated by the Valuations Division of $1.6 million or the purchase price of $1.2 million.

He said, ”The rule is that stamp duty is paid on the value of the property or what is paid for it, whichever is higher.”

Asked if he informed Dr Rowley of any change in the quantum of stamp duties to be paid for the property, he said, “That would be the advice any attorney would give to his client.

“And that is the normal manner that transactions such as this are dealt with.”

On the actual amount paid in stamp duties on the Inez Gate property, Blaize said, “ It would be on the registered copy of the deed which is available to the public.”

Newsday obtained a stamped copy of the registered deed which showed Sharon Clark-Rowley, as lessee, paid $33,500 in stamp duties on the Inez Gate townhouse on August 16, 2019. The property on the deed was valued at $1,680,000 and was purchased from Inez Investments Ltd, whose principal is said to be contractor Allan Warner.

The commission said based on the evidence obtained during the course of the commission’s investigation, there was no indication that a valuation report was submitted to the Inland Revenue Division for the Inez Gate transaction.

“Furthermore, the commission found no evidence of any alteration from a lower stamp value to a higher stamp value to raise an inference that there was a change in the circumstances which was so significant that Dr Rowley had to be made aware of same.

“Additionally, the commission reiterates that it had no evidence suggesting that Dr Rowley knew of the valuation of the said townhouse unit for stamp duty purposes.”

It again maintained it did not actively seek to “exculpate Dr Rowley,” nor was its investigation done in a “piecemeal manner.”

It also again rejected that its actions reeked of political bias.

Although it did find that Dr Rowley did breach the act by not declaring the Shirvan property on Form B statement of registrable interests, it said terminated its investigation because there was no criminal offence and accompanying sanction within the statutory boundaries of the IPLA regarding his omission.

The Integrity Commission also said the IPLA requires a false declaration to be “knowingly made.” It also again disclosed that in February, it wrote to the Office of the Prime Minister with suggestions to have the act amended to “garner greater compliance with the statute.”

It said from the evidence obtained, it believed Dr Rowley “did not knowingly provide false information in his declaration.”

The commission also acknowledged that the Prime Minister received a “gift” in the form of a discount on the price of the townhouse, which was valued at $1,680,000 but that the discount was not connected directly or indirectly with the performance of his duties as PM.

The commission noted that the discount the Prime Minister received on the purchase was $480,000.

In its September 14 response, it again reiterated that the law did not permit it to construct an intention to impose a criminal sanction.

“In these circumstances, the commission does not view that it has adopted an illogical, unreasonable and arbitrary opinion not to refer the matter to the DPP.”