Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar and Attorney General Garvin Nicholas are now facing the heat over their criticisms of Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Joan Honore-Paul in the continuing war of words over the Emailgate probe.
Former attorney general Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, Independent Liberal Party (ILP) leader Jack Warner, Alliance of Independents interim leader Nicole Dyer-Griffith and Douglas Mendes, SC, yesterday all defended Honore-Paul’s right to not only address the matter, but to do so without interference from the Government because of the independence of her office.
Maharaj slammed Nicholas’ statement, saying he acted “unlawfully” and had undermined the Office of the DPP and other key institutions.
He said the issue was still under investigation and Nicholas was out of line since Honore-Paul’s statements on the Emailgate matter contained the truth.
“What the deputy DPP said was simply the truth that the investigation was still ongoing. The contents to the statements made by the Attorney General reflect that he did not understand his role as Attorney General because the deputy DPP does not have to seek his permission to make a statement.
“Under the Constitution the DPP is solely responsible for criminal prosecution and matters related thereto.
“The deputy DPP is not accountable to the AG nor does she have a duty to call him,” Maharaj said.
Weighing in on the issue, Warner said both the PM and Nicholas had overstepped their boundaries.
“If the PM had not taken evidence obtained via the application of the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (MLACM) Treaty with the United States, and waved it around like a political bandana and then attacked and undermined our independent institutions, there would have been no need for the deputy DPP to issue any statement in the first place,” he said.
“It is the PM and the AG who forced the deputy DPP to break the silence which she had maintained throughout the life thus far of this issue.”
Warner too said the deputy DPP was under no obligation to inform or seek guidance from the AG before initiating steps to protect her office from the damage inflicted by the misconduct of the PM, since the first duty of the deputy DPP was to protect her constitutionally created and independent office and not to soothe the fragile emotions and ego of Nicholas.
Dyer-Griffith called on Nicholas to allow the Office of the DPP to do its work as it was constitutionally entitled to.
“It is important that no such interaction or engagement should be encouraged, to prevent any perception of attempting to influence a particular outcome, as the Office of the DPP is charged with the final responsibility to lay charges in criminal matters,” she said.
“This being stated, it is to be noted that this matter is still being investigated, and as such, the issue of ‘clearance of name’ must be understood within the context that no one must also be labelled as ‘suspects’ in the matter as it is still under investigation, and no such conclusions have been drawn.
Independent office
Douglas Mendes, SC, who is currently out of the country, said the deputy DPP acted well within her role when she chastised Persad-Bissessar for suggesting that she and her colleagues had been cleared in the Emailgate probe when the case was still open. He said it was entirely appropriate for Honore-Paul to provide the public with an update on the issue.
“She (Honore-Paul) made it clear that the investigation is not limited to the question of whether the emails are fake, but includes whether the allegations made in the emails themselves are true.
“It was also important and appropriate that she should clarify that the police have not yet cleared anyone and that the US authorities made no comment on anyone’s guilt or innocence.
“She was also clearly right to upbraid those responsible for putting the confidential communication from the US authorities into the pubic domain. That this communication should not have been in the PM’s hands is obviously a matter of public interest,” Mendes said.
Mendes said he saw no cause for the deputy DPP to recuse herself from advising the police on the matter.
“She has said nothing which indicates that she has made up her mind about any aspect of the case and in fact was careful to emphasise at every turn that the investigation is still underway and no conclusion has yet been arrived at,” Mendes added.
Attorney Sophia Chote, SC, said: “It is my view the deputy DPP in her statement appears to have fudged the roles between what constitutionally falls within the power and authority of the DPP and that of the Commissioner of Police.
“Perhaps prudence ought to have dictated the distancing of an independent office from the heat of political comments.”