Lambert-Peterson steps down from revenue authority lawsuit

High Court judge Betsy Ann Lambert-Peterson has recused herself from hearing the challenge of the constitutionality of the TT Revenue Authority Act and the operationalisation of several portions of it.

On Thursday, Lambert-Peterson said she was not prepared to have the administration of justice trampled on, nor will she be a party to it by trying to persuade anyone she will be impartial or unbiased in the case.

“This case will not be prepared to sit in judgment of its own behaviour. This court will recuse itself from further hearing of the matter.”

She said when the matter first came to her attention, she agreed it was time-sensitive. She also said transferring the recusal application made by the Public Services Association (PSA) and its member Terrisa Dhoray would only lead to the absorption of more time, which was not needed.

The matter will now be transferred to another judge.

She also said she looked at the evidence submitted in the PSA’s application and had rejected it.

She also assured that she had been addressing complaints about e-mails from court staff at the highest levels of the Judiciary.

In their application, the PSA had complained of possible “pillow talk” between a husband and his wife that might taint the judge’s view of the case before her.

The judge is the wife of Senior Counsel Gibert Peterson.

In their recusal application, the PSA said, “There is a strong possibility of bias on the part of the court as this is her husband of many years and the reality of life is such that ‘pillow talk’ between a husband and his wife is bound to occur...

“The mere fact that the court is aware of the fact that her husband is a strong supporter of the government and ruling party from which he earns substantial income and enjoys the privilege of chairmanship of two major statutory bodies is likely to have a subconscious influence on the court.”

Peterson is the chairman of the Legal Aid Advisory Authority (LAAA) and the Telecommunications Authority (TATT).

Lambert-Peterson was previously asked to step down in a letter sent by the PSA’s attorneys.

She said having seen the letter, which concerned her husband, there was no basis for her to recuse herself.

In a statement last Friday, the judge maintained she had no political relationship with her husband or anyone else.

In the application, the PSA and Dhoray maintained the matter was politically sensitive because of the importance to the government and the ruling party, and Dhoray was of the view that there was a realistic possibility of unconscious and subconscious bias because of the judge's husband.

In her statement, the judge said the case was docketed to her.

“This is an administrative process, over which I have no control. This matter, like any other constitutional motion listed before me, will be determined on its merits.

“I have no ‘political connection.’”

She admitted her husband had a professional relationship with the Prime Minister and played golf with a group which includes Dr Rowley.

Lambert-Peterson said her husband had no political affiliations or relationships.

“I am not aware of him lending political support to the People’s National Movement, or any person or political party.”

She also said there was no need for her to notify Dhoray that she was married to Peterson, nor was any complaint raised by Dhoray’s attorney, Anand Ramlogan, SC, when the matter was first docketed to her.

She also said no matter how small the case was, she did not adjudicate in any involving Peterson.

Responding to the apparent bias application that her husband was the personal lawyer, a close friend and golfing partner of the prime minister, she said as far as she knew, Peterson represented Dr Rowley in several court matters and he adheres to the "cab-rank" rule, which prevents advocate attorneys from refusing work because they disagree with the actions or views of those seeking their services.

She again said she knows Dr Rowley to be one of her husband’s golfing friends, not his “golfing partner” ;had been appointed by the President on the advice of the government on two state boards; was also the chairman of the disciplinary committee of the Law Association; and was appointed senior counsel in 2003.

“His counsel is widely sought. I am aware that Mr Peterson’s appointments are based on his legal experience and standing and are not ‘political appointments.’”

“I have no knowledge of Mr Peterson, SC, displaying political bias.”

On his “lucrative legal briefs from the government and him being a strong supporter of the ruling PNM, she had this to say: “I do not know Mr Peterson to have any party affiliation. I am aware that he has been retained from time to time by the State through the respective offices of the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Attorney General by virtue of the State Liability and Proceedings Act.”

She said when retained, he is remunerated for the work done. “I am aware that Mr Peterson’s legal counsel is sought by governments throughout the English–speaking Caribbean.”

Lambert-Peterson also admitted he spoke against a motion of no confidence in the Attorney General in 2022 and had bought two townhouses in Tobago from Inez Investments Ltd.

“I am not aware of the political affiliations of the persons who own townhouses in that development.”

On her husband’s bunkering licence, she said he was a director of RH Gas Ltd but she was not privy to the company’s operations nor aware of any controversy concerning this company.

“I have nothing to disclose. I have been a judicial officer since 1995. I am bound by the oaths taken during my career on the Bench.

“Through my qualifications, experience and training, including training on ‘implicit bias’ I adjudicate in a wide cross-section of matters on a daily basis.

“Marriage has not dimmed my ability to exercise a high degree of agency in my personal and professional life,” she said in her statement.

Dhoray’s substantive lawsuit contests the implementation of section 18 of the TTRA Act, which deals with the enforcement division of the TTRA. It contends that it forces employees of the IRD and CED to decide by August 1 if they want to join the authority.

By legal notice on April 14, President Christine Kangaloo proclaimed certain sections of the TTRA with effect from May 1. This, the lawsuit contends, took employees by surprise.

On June 5, Lambert-Peterson dismissed an injunction application which sought to halt the operations of the TTRA, including recruiting staff.

The recusal application also raised concerns about how the judge treated it. An appeal of this decision has been filed and will be heard on July 4.