Armour, Al-Rawi and $20m

Appearing quite mystified over the missing, “malicious prosecution” case file and the $20 million award to nine claimants, Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs Reginald Armour, SC, declared it “sinister, outrageous and incredulous (sic).”
The Prime Minister said he was “very disturbed.” Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar said, “Fire Armour and former AG Faris Al-Rawi.”

“Flabbergasted,” Israel Khan, SC, who (with Gilbert Peterson, SC, and Dana Seetahal, SC) prosecuted in the original murder trial, called for a commission of enquiry.
Former attorney general Al-Rawi chooses silence for now.
However, the most disturbing of all is the great loss of public confidence in the administration of justice.

Faced with a confusing failure to defend against the nine claimants’ allegations of “harsh prison conditions,” last week Supreme Court Master Martha Alexander awarded over $20 million in compensation to the nine freed murder accused, whose claims were led by former AG Anand Ramlogan, SC (with Gary Ramkissoon, Renuka Rambhajan, Ganesh Saroop and Natasha Bisram).

Justice Joan Charles had given a default judgment for the nine claimants in January 2021. They were in prison for some ten years, having been acquitted of the murder of Vindra Naipaul-Coolman in 2016 by High Court judge Malcolm Holdip. So it's double jeopardy within the AG's office – missing file and no defence.

The disturbing frequency of expensive lapses and failed defences within the country’s administration of justice is of great concern to taxpayers.

This is yet another red-flag case regarding the role of lawyers and the expensive lack of proper oversight by the AG and ministers. The AG said a state-of-case file was served on May 29, 2020, on the Solicitor General’s department and signed as received. On June 22, 2020, the file was sent to the then acting Solicitor General, Carol Hernandez, and signed by an officer as received. The file disappeared the next day. court records revealed there was no appearance by state attorneys in malicious prosecution lawsuit.

Given the increasing number of successful civil suits filed against the AG and state agencies, Mr Armour made a revealing disclosure. He referred to a January 23, 2018 memo sent to the Solicitor General’s office by then AG Al-Rawi, which advised that instructions are required from the AG in such litigation matters.

Again, in terms of oversight and “instruction,” why then did the Privy Council find it necessary two months ago to criticise WASA lawyers in a civil action against WASA for leaks that caused collapse to a citizen’s house? Who “instructed” WASA lawyers to continue to appeal to the Privy Council after losing in the High Court then Appeal Court? Was it to “spite” the homeowner? Given the evidential facts and WASA’s “statutory neglect,” the Privy Council not only dismissed WASA’s appeal, but admonished WASA's lawyers.

It declared: “This second appeal has been brought without heeding the settled practice of the PC Board that it will not, save in special circumstances, review concurrent findings of fact made by two lower courts. It is an appeal which should not have been brought as it was bound to fail.”
WASA was ordered to pay $2.2 million and costs – taxpayers' money for legal fees too.

Will lessons now be learnt by the AG and Al-Rawi from these court rulings? Will Local Government Minister Al-Rawi support “statutory neglect” by a state agency?

In the $20 million malicious prosecution case and the AG’s office “failure to defend,” Supreme Court Master Martha Alexander advised that the state lawyers previously presented authorities that were “misaligned” and of “little use to the court.” Did anyone in the AG's office “instruct” them in trial preparation?

The master further said: “It is an exercise in futility by attorneys if they provide comparators that are obviously misaligned with the present facts. It requires the court to spend its time in pointing out to attorneys who should know better their lack of equivalence and relevance of suggested cases.”
What about Al-Rawi's 2018 memo?

While Mr Armour dutifully initiates an enquiry into the missing file, given the list of civil suits against the AG and state agencies, he may consider undertaking a review of this list and as previously noted, save costs to taxpayers, possibly millions.