(Trinidad Express) The Integrity Commission has hit back at Attorney General Anand Ramlogan, labelling his recent statements against the commission as “misleading and inaccurate”.
In a full-page press advertisement today, the commission said such statements could “lead to serious misunderstanding on the part of the public”, and needed to be addressed.
The commission stated it had been accused by the Attorney Genneral of suppressing his letters of November 7, 11 and 13, of breaching his legal right to be informed of the investigation with respect to his Range Rover vehicles, as well as procedural impropriety and of leaking information to the Express.
Ramlogan, who has come under fire for issues surrounding the licensing and registration of two Range Rovers he imported into the country, issued a statement last Sunday, calling for the resignation of the commission’s chairman, Kenneth Gordon, following reports that he (Ramlogan) was being investigated by the commission.
Ramlogan said he had not been informed of such a probe.
The commission yesterday explained it had received three letters from Ramlogan over a period of seven days. The first was on November 7, enquiring whether a complaint had been lodged; the second, dated November 11 (received November 13), implying deliberate leaks to the Express; and another on November 13, requesting copies of correspondence be sent to all commissioners.
The commission pointed out it meets weekly. “There was a meeting held on Tuesday, November 12, 2013. At that meeting the commission had before it for consideration Mr Ramlogan’s letter dated November 7, 2013. However, the commission also had before it a draft letter of November 6, 2013, for approval, which was intended to inform Mr Ramlogan that an investigation on the matter had commenced. The commission found it necessary to adjust its letter of November 6, 2013, to inter alia acknowledge receipt of Mr Ramlogan’s letter of November 7, 2013. Mr Ramlogan was so informed,” the commission said.
It added: “It must be emphasised that the commission was under no obligation to apologise to Mr Ramlogan. It merely extended discretionary courtesy in view of the six-week period that had elapsed between September 23 (when the investigation commenced) and November 7, 2013. Similar courtesies have been extended to others. Mr Ramlogan’s letters of November 11 and 13, 2013, are scheduled for the next meeting of the commission.”
As to claims Ramlogan’s legal rights were breached, the commission said: “Nothing could be further from the truth. Mr Ramlogan can point to no legal right to be informed of an investigation being conducted by the Integrity Commission unless he comes within Section 38 of the Integrity in Public Life Act (IPLA), (The Act).”
It explained: “Section 38 is pellucidly clear: no report concluding that a person to whom this act applies has failed without reasonable justification to fulfil a duty or obligation under this act shall be made until reasonable notice has been given to such person of the alleged failure and the person has been allowed full opportunity to be heard either in person or by an attorney-at-law.”
The statement added that Ramlogan’s legal right to be heard only arises if the report from the commission concludes the person under investigation has breached any of his obligations under the act. A report is only prepared following completion of the investigation.
It further stated the Attorney General can point to nothing that was procedurally improper in the course of action taken by the commission, adding, “The commission has followed both the letter and the spirit of the law in the conduct of this investigation.”
The commission said it rejected outright the clear inference made by the Attorney General that the commission and, more particularly, its chairman had leaked information to the Express. “It is unfortunate and to be deeply regretted that so irresponsible a charge could be flippantly made without any supporting evidence. The commission has previously demonstrated its commitment to its oath of office and will continue to do so.”
Ramlogan, in his statement last Sunday, said the latest developments, including what he described as the suppression of the letter advising him the commission had launched an investigation into the purchase of the two Range Rovers, were an issue that could “cause irreparable damage and harm to the independence of the Integrity Commission”, and “erode public confidence and intensify the perception that the commission is biased against the Government”.
