Nelson: I never instructed attorney to seal civil claim
Black Immigrant Daily News
Vincent Nelson, KC. –
King’s Counsel Vincent Nelson says he never instructed his attorneys to seal his civil claim against the Attorney General for an alleged breach of an indemnity agreement with the Government.
Nelson filed his claim alleging breach of an indemnity agreement with the Government to protect him from criminal prosecution and possible proceedings outside of Trinidad and Tobago in exchange for a statement alleging a legal fees kickback scheme with former attorney general Anand Ramlogan and ex-UNC senator Gerald Ramdeen.
On Friday, his recently retained attorney, Shankar Bidassie officially filed an application in the High Court to unseal his civil claim which is assigned to Justice Jacqueline Wilson.
The filing of the application to unseal the claim came after attorneys for the State responded to a request from Bidaisee to agree to the move.
Newsday was told the State said it will vigorously resist the application to unseal the claim because of significant overlap between the criminal proceedings and the civil proceedings.
The criminal proceedings refers to the discontinued charges against Ramlogan and Ramdeen.
Nelson’s attorney was told that the DPP has expressly reserved the possibility of reinstituting the criminal charges at the end of the civil claim.
The State contends it would be vital to the interests of justice for the seal to remain in place.
Bidaisee was also reminded it was his client who applied, in the first place, to have the matter sealed because of the criminal prosecution against Ramlogan and Ramdeen to avoid pre-trial publicity.
They also said courts are known to put what is called a “ring fencing order” in matters that are likely to affect a criminal case.
Nelson’s claim was filed in May, this year, by one of his former attorneys who represented him at his plea-deal hearing in 2019 and 2020.
Information obtained by Newsday shows Nelson fired the attorney, who is a member of the PNM.
In correspondence, Nelson said he had concerns of conflict of interest and felt it would give him “peace of mind” to terminate the retainer.
On Monday, Director of Public Prosecutions Roger Gaspard, SC, announced the State was dropping the charges against Ramlogan and Ramdeen.
He said Nelson was not willing to give evidence in that matter until his claim for breach of the alleged indemnity agreement came to an end.
Gaspard also told the court on Monday, the State “redeems the option of course to review the case when the civil proceedings have been concluded.
“Suffice it to say, this court may be well aware that one of the primary considerations the State must consider is whether or not there is a fair prospect of conviction and at this stage and having regard to the fact that those civil proceedings may raise germane issues which may attend upon the credibility and reliability of Mr Nelson, the State at this stage is saying that we are discontinuing the case against the two defendants.
“Any other option, in my respectful view, especially having regard to the time that would have elapsed and the uncertainty of outcomes in relation to that civil case would make for unfairness to these defendants, and the DPP’s office is especially careful not to do anything that would cause the DPP’s office of the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service to be associated with any such unfairness.”
In his letter on Tuesday, Bidaisee said the claim arose out of the conduct of former attorney general Faris Al-Rawi “in entering into an indemnity agreement on behalf of the Government and agreeing to bind same to the terms of the said agreement,” and was based on “confirmation by Mr Al-Rawi that it was the conduct of Honourable Minister Stuart Young that has resulted in a substantial breach of the terms of the indemnity.”
The letter also said the allegations set out in Nelson’s claim touch and concern the Office of the President, the Office of the DPP, the Cabinet and the Mercy Committee.
“At paragraph 22 of the amended defence filed in these proceedings it was pleaded that the actions of Mr Al-Rawi, as Attorney General, in entering into the indemnity agreement was in conflict with public policy” and “taxpayers of this country are exposed to the payment of substantial damages claimed by our client in the event that the claim is successful,” Bidaisee said.
The attorney said as “guardian of the public interest,” the Office of the AG should consent to the discharge of the sealing order so the contents of the claim can be made public.
In his claim, Nelson is seeking £12,163,460 in damages for the alleged breach of indemnity because he can no longer work as a tax attorney in the UK.
He is also claiming the State should indemnify him for the $2.25 million fine ordered by the High Court when he was sentenced in March 2020.
NewsAmericasNow.com
