Amid criticism from senior government officials, Ombudsman Justice Winston Moore yesterday defended his report on a complaint that had been brought by former Chief Executive Officer of the New Building Society (NBS), Maurice Arjoon and challenged detractors to show where he had acted unfairly.
Moore’s report on the complaint contained the finding that a “grave injustice” had been done to Arjoon and two other managers as there was no evidence to sustain the charge of conspiracy to defraud which was eventually brought by the police against the trio.
Moore, who assumed the office this year after it had been vacant for nearly a decade, held a press conference yesterday at Cara Lodge following almost two weeks of criticisms of his findings to clear the air on misconceptions about his handling of the matter and his conclusions.
Arjoon along with two managers were fired by NBS in 2007 after they were implicated in the unauthorised withdrawal in 2006 of $69 million from an account at the financial institution. In January, Arjoon lodged a complaint with the Ombudsman and in keeping with his mandate, Moore launched an investigation. The Ombudsman’s focus was on persons who Arjoon had implicated.
Reading from a prepared statement, Moore told reporters that he was surprised when he read the comments alleged to have been made by current Labour Minister Dr. Nanda Gopaul, who was Chairman of NBS in 2007, concerning “what I was supposed to have said about the NBS. I immediately called Dr. Gopaul by phone expressing my surprise and inviting him to point out where I had made these comments.”
He said that following the publishing of the contents of his report, he received a letter from “an eminent Senior Counsel” on behalf of NBS to the same effect, citing reports in the Kaieteur News and Stabroek News. Moore emphasised that he only sent reports to those named in his report and “to no one else.” He said that he had no knowledge of how the report ended up in the hands of the press.
With regards to the letter from the Senior Counsel, Moore told reporters that it stated that the response from Dr. Gopaul to an inquiry posed by the Ombudsman in relation to Arjoon’s complaint was not mentioned and it also made mention that the NBS never accused any staff of fraud.
“I calmly acknowledged the letter and asked for particulars of anything written by me in my report on a complaint by Mr. Maurice Arjoon which stigmatises the NBS,” he said before sharing some of the contents of the attorney’s letter.
The letter said that in part that “it is apparent from the visible parts of your report in issue that the New Building Society Limited are patently wrong and vindictive in taking disciplinary action against three concerned Managers and this is without giving the Society an opportunity to respond to the allegations made against them and in light of a sub judice matter.”
Justice Moore, in his response, pointed out that his request was “for you to furnish me with particulars of anything written to me in my report which stigmatised your clients. Please note I am not responsible for anything published in any newspaper.”
Moore stressed that the focus of his report was on criminal charges brought against the NBS managers and in particular, “the prosecution pressing on with those charges after the arrest of one Ashley Legall and considering the content of the statement given by Legall to the police.”
“I can confidently state that not one sentence in my report contains any reference to anything allegedly done by the NBS Board,” he said.
Later, he said that in his report he mentioned that his investigation was propelled by allegations against public officials. “I am not concerned with NBS and how they dealt with their staff. That is not the concern of the Ombudsman,” he said.
He explained that the Constitution details extensively his jurisdiction in dealing with complaints made against public officials and his powers.
It was Gopaul who first challenged the Ombuds-man’s jurisdiction in the matter.
“Importantly, the learned Ombudsman-man does not have the mandate and jurisdiction to review the decision of a private company to dismiss its employees. The fact that the company was not even consulted simply compounds the wrong,” Gopaul had declared in a press release.
But Justice Moore told reporters, “I stake my reputation on this statement that from the documents I have read, there is absolutely no evidence from which any fair minded person could reasonably conclude that these persons are guilty.” He further stressed that he did not find any evidence of wrongdoing where the fraud was concerned. “I said before and I restate, I have said nothing concerning how the NBS dealt with their staff,” he added.
Asked to comment on the linkage of his findings with an existing sub judice matter, Moore said, “I do not see this report violating the rules about a sub judice matter.” He said that based on his understanding, the matter before the court is a civil one in which Arjoon is the plaintiff. He stressed that he is not concerned with that matter. “My report is concerned with a criminal matter so I do not see any violation of the sub judice rules… This is why I am inviting these persons to show me where I mentioned something about the NBS and it would affect anything before the court,” he said, while stressing on the need to show where in the report he is being unfair to NBS as it relates to how the staff is treated.
He said that he has found out some things he did not know before, including the non-disclosure of a statement from Legall to Arjoon’s lawyer. He said that in law there is a rule that the prosecution should disclose something that may be useful to the defence. “I did not set out for anything here to collide with anything before the court,” he said, while noting that what was contained in the file is only half of what he found out.
Asked whether anything reported in the media contradicts his finding, he made mention of an “unfair headline” in the Kaieteur News. He said the headline referred to former president Bharrat Jagdeo and him reportedly firing someone over the Berbice River Bridge. “I thought that that was unfair because when you read the report it is what Mr. Arjoon is alleging…I made so such finding concerning the former president,” he noted.
Moore said that it appears as though the senior counsel who wrote him did not read the report. “I don’t think he read the report. How could he have made those statements …and I invited him to do that (read the report),” he said.
The Ombudsman later clarified that none of the persons he sent copies of his report to had made any complaints about the contents in writing as he had requested. Three of those persons: Police Commissioner Seelall Persaud, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Shalimar Ali-Hack and Dr. Gopaul instead chose to make comments in the press. “I can’t tell people what to do. In performing my job, I observed the proper protocol,” he said.
Justice Moore has since laid over copies of his report to the Clerk of the National Assembly for the purpose of laying it before the National Assembly.
He urged persons to read the report and to be guided by its contents.
The Ombudsman’s report has been lauded by stakeholders, who see it as a welcome manifestation of the restoration of an important constitutional office and institution.
