(Trinidad Guardian) The Law Association of T&T has defended its move to host a special general meeting to discuss and debate a no-confidence motion in Attorney General Reginald Armour, SC, over his role in the ongoing United States civil asset recovery case related to fraud allegations in the construction of the Piarco International Airport.
In a press release issued last evening, the association sought to challenge criticism of the motion levelled by Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley during a press conference at the airport before he left to attend a Caricom heads of government meeting in Suriname on Saturday.
During the media briefing, Rowley said: “As for the Law Association, the only thing I am concerned about is who in this country has the opportunity to pass a vote of no-confidence against the Law Association? Because I want to vote.”
In its correspondence, the association noted that under the Legal Profession Act, it was obligated to call such a meeting once it received a requisition from at least 25 members.
“Our members are fully entitled to engage this process and to ventilate matters which members view as falling within the mandate of the Legal Profession Act,” it said.
It noted that before the meeting was set for 2 pm next Friday, it sought to gather relevant documentation and invited Armour to respond.
“The Law Association will proceed with appropriate deliberation observing the principles of fairness and natural justice,” it said.
The association also sought to directly address Rowley’s claim that it had previously attempted to entrap him to be a witness in another matter involving Chief Justice Ivor Archie.
“So, if you find me unfazed by the Law Association, I have good grounds because they only seem to be interested when it is time to create public discord. When it’s time to stand up for the public interest, they bury their heads in the sand like ostriches,” Rowley said of that matter as he noted the body had surreptitiously attempted to involve him in the CJ matter.
The association claimed that it was disappointed by the “misleading” comments and called on Rowley to withdraw them.
The association noted that the matter involving Archie was related to his alleged communications with Rowley.
It noted that it conducted an enquiry into the allegations, which was challenged by Archie but upheld by the Privy Council.
It said that it then contacted Rowley to confirm whether there had been such communication and received no response.
Rowley only denied the claims of improper communication when he announced that he would not impeach Archie under Section 137 of the Constitu-tion in July 2019.
“The Law Association’s enquiry was neither surreptitious nor an attempt to entrap the Prime Minister as alleged or at all,” LATT said, as claimed that it had to ask Rowley the questions as part of its enquiry of the matter.
“It is indeed regrettable that the Law Association acted improperly in discharging its legitimate functions,” it added.
In the original requisition for the meeting, which was signed by over three dozen members, attorney Kiel Taklalsingh said the group felt that the issue should be discussed by the membership, as it concerns the integrity of the legal profession.
“Respectfully, these allegations, if left unaddressed, have the potential to erode public confidence in our profession, the administration of justice, and the rule of law,” Taklalsingh said.
The issue surrounding Armour
In late April, Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Reemberto Diaz disqualified Armour and Sequor Law, the US firm which was representing this country’s interest, from continued participation in the Piarco civil case.
The judge’s decision was reportedly based on Armour allegedly downplaying his role in previously representing former finance minister Brian Kuei Tung in separate local criminal proceedings over the project.
However, the judge refused Kuei Tung’s other application to strike out the entire lawsuit.
Former attorney general and current Local Government Minister Faris Al-Rawi was appointed as the substitute client representative for this country in the case, which is scheduled to come up for hearing in September.
The State, through its new legal team, has challenged the decision but has been refused an expedited hearing of the appeal.
In a full-page newspaper advertisement, published after public commentary over what transpired in the case, Armour sought to cautiously address the issue, as he denied that he misled the US court when he initially claimed that he only played a minor role in representing Kuei Tung which was limited to research and note-taking.
Armour claimed that his initial affidavit to the court was prepared whilst he was abroad in Europe on vacation and he did not have access to his office records to fully recall the extent of his involvement in the case over 14 years ago.
He also claimed he was not allowed to rectify the error when he had an opportunity to verify his records shortly after.
Despite previous reports on the transcript of the decision in the case, Rowley claimed that Armour was not disqualified as claimed but rather recused himself from the case.
“I don’t know about any automatic disqualification, I know about a recusal, and I am staying right there,” Rowley said during the media conference.