Maritime Financial Group on Piarco charges: Stop the political vendetta
Black Immigrant Daily News
An estimated $1.6 billion contract to upgrade the Piarco International Airport in 1995 is the project for which several people and companies are charged for corruption in Trinidad and Tobago and the US. File photo/Roger Jacob
THE Maritime Financial Group is calling on the Government to “cease its remaining misguided efforts to use the court system” to claim political victories on “unfounded charges and allegations.”
Two of the group’s subsidiaries – Fidelity Finance and Maritime General Insurance – and its executives, Steve Ferguson, John Smith, Edward Bayley, and Barbara Gomes, are among those charged in related Piarco inquiries along with former government ministers and other business people.
They are accused of conspiring to convert more than $19 million under false pretenses from the Airports Authority.
The offences are alleged to have occurred in the US, TT, The Bahamas, and elsewhere between September 1, 1996, and December 31, 2005.
Smith was murdered in July 2021.
In a full-page press advertisement, the group said, to date the government’s efforts have only “cost taxpayers more money than the initial ‘fraud’ the Government is claiming to try to correct; been consistently refuted by the evidence over more than 20 years of judicial and legal proceedings; sullied the reputations of honest and good individuals, and caused embarrassment to the reputation of Trinidad and Tobago abroad.”
The company maintained, “The longer this wears on, the more taxpayers’ money will be wasted, reducing the ability of Government to focus on the needs of our schools, our health care, our infrastructure, the true crime-fighting needs we face, and the general welfare of our nation.”
The statement said Maritime has always known the charges against the group “were without any merit,” but was saddened that “this saga” has dragged out for more than 20 years, at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars to taxpayers.
“It has clearly not been a benefit to the citizens and taxpayers of Trinidad and Tobago to deplete the Treasury’s scarce resources on politically-motivated claims rather than devoting resources to the needs of the country and its people.”
Maritime Financial said to date, not one of the charges related to Piarco has been sustained in the courts.
“Yet the Government continues with its ongoing efforts to prosecute a partisan political victory in the court.” The statement said in addition to the waste of public funds, there was personal tragedy for Maritime’s employees and their families.
The statement mentioned Gomes, Bayley, and Smith, the last two having died.
“There is no adequate justification or compensation for the harm to the personal reputations of these fine people and their families. All of this in the pursuit of narrow interests of a political vendetta carried out by a few people of influence in Government.”
The statement also quoted from the June 27 ruling of the Privy Council which held that a complaint by Smith and Gomes, charged in the Piarco I inquiry, of apparent bias against then chief magistrate Sherman McNicolls was sufficient to strike down their committal to stand trial before a judge and jury and the statement of DPP Roger Gaspard, SC, who made it clear that the London court did not dismiss any of the charges against those in the Piarco 1 inquiry.
Maritime Financial said the Privy Council was not asked to dismiss any charge. It also said McNicolls, on January 8, 2008, had already dismissed all of the defendants of all charges and committed them to stand trial on amended and additional charges he previously refused to entertain.
When the prosecution closed its case in September 2006, the Piarco 1 inquiry was adjourned for submissions on no-case submissions. One month later, the prosecution filed a notice of proposed amendments and additional charges. The defence objected and McNicolls ruled there could be no change to the charges after the close of the prosecution’s case. On July 9, 2007, McNicolls ruled on the no-case submissions and discharged the defendants on the original charges but committed them to stand trial on the amended and additional charges.
Maritime Financial pointed out it was this decision, to commit the defendants on new charges, that was quashed by the Privy Council.
It said Maritime and its employees never had an opportunity to defend and respond to the new and amended charges before the committal.
The DPP has since said he is now considering the future of the matter.
There are three other inquiries arising out of the Piarco airport expansion project debacle and varying stages before the courts.
Gaspard said it has been his public position that “taking Piarco I to trial would have been oppressive if not legally nettlesome while the other matters related to the airport project were in train, bearing in mind that there were common accused in both sets of matters.” Instead, he said, “A joint trial of the allegations in Piarco No I and those arising from those other matters was desirable.”
NewsAmericasNow.com
