(Trinidad Express) Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Roger Gaspard, SC, yesterday said there have been attempts by the Attorney General to interfere in his independent office.
He made the statement during a Joint Select Committee (JSC) meeting on National Security yesterday at the Red House, Port of Spain.
The DPP did not state exactly which AG he was referring to.
He spent just about two hours alleging there was overreach, conflict between the DPP’s Office and AG’s office, staff shortages, confusion over whether he can hire contracted employment, and his office being handicapped with no allocated budget, for which he has been advocating for many years.
The DPP acknowledged the lengthy delay in the delivery of justice, saying he was embarrassed by it.
“Like any right-thinking citizens, the pedestrian pace of matters by way of carriage through the courts is something that concerns me and embarrasses me deeply, and it should embarrass all major stakeholders in the criminal justice system,” he said.
The DPP said his office is beholden to the AG, as he disclosed that a training retreat was planned for his staff but because of conflict with the AG (whom he did not name) this was cancelled.
Gaspard said it is an anomaly that other “so-called” independent institutions have their own budgets and the DPP’s office does not.
DPP: Let me spectacularly highlight my situation…some time ago someone who occupied the chair of Attorney General had a conflict with someone who occupied the chair of DPP. During the pendency of that conflict the DPP’s office would have or before the conflict crystallised, the DPP’s office would have arranged to have a retreat and a training sessions with the staff. Because of the conflict, that Attorney General, in his wisdom, then decided to indicate to the DPP that because of that conflict he’s not allocating any resources for the training retreat…This happened as a fact and I am speaking from my own knowledge.”
He said the DPP’s office is one that is in this country’s Constitution and it cannot be that if the office wants a scanner it will be dependent on “the complexion of my relationship with the incumbent Attorney General or any of his predecessors. That cannot be and should not be”.
Opposition Senator Jayanti Lutchmedial said there may be conflict, given that the AG’s office is a political one, and there may be an issue in providing resources to the DPP, as he may have matters before him that would seriously impact upon the incumbent AG or any other person.
Gaspard said he agrees, adding this was the reason why he advocated very strongly that the Anti-Corruption Bureau be removed from under the AG’s purview.
Port of Spain South MP Keith Scotland interjected, saying the relationship between the AG and DPP is a constitutional arrangement.
The DPP retorted that there was an Appeal Court case (Seeromani Naraynsingh) that cleared up the relationship with the DPP.
He said the AG is the line minister and on matters of national importance, and the DPP is duty-bound to apprise the AG of certain developments.
DPP: But the AG has no place in the executive decision-making of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Scotland: Are you saying that there is an intervention by the office of the AG in the decision-making process of the DPP?
DPP: I am not saying that there are interventions by the AG, put the incumbent aside, bearing in mind my institutional memory there have been attempts at interference in the DPP’s office and I am speaking from my own knowledge.
Scotland: And, Director, those attempts that you are speaking about, have you actioned them? Have you written about them? Have you brought them to anyone’s attention?
DPP: I have.
Conflict over hiring
There is confusion as to whether the DPP can hire contract staff, as the DPP disclosed that he wrote enquiring about this, given that the DPP’s office is not functioning in the way that it should.
He said staff comes to the office via State attorneys (appointed by the Judicial and Legal Services Commission (JLSC) headed by the Chief Justice), and by contract.
Gaspard said six weeks ago he asked Deputy DPP Joan Honore-Paul to enquire from the permanent secretary (PS) as to whether or not the DPP could recruit staff.
The PS, he said, responded that he could not recruit staff notwithstanding that he is deemed to be a chief legal officer—which is different from a chief financial officer.
He added that, historically, no DPP has recruited staff and has been asked to recruit staff.
The DPP disclosed that he then received communication from the AG saying he can hire.
He added, “Lo and behold only Monday gone, last Monday, the Honourable Attorney General would have written to me saying that you can recruit staff since you are a chief legal officer, you just have to liaise with my PS.”
Gaspard said to equate the DPP as a chief legal officer with a PS, “in my respectful view, is a misplaced equation since the PS has control over certain budgetary and financial resources which no DPP has”.
The DPP said his office has a staff of 58 and requires 137 to efficiently run—the number requested since 2013.
He outlined the heavy portfolio the DPP’s office carries with the increase in additional courts in addition to the Magistracy and High Courts, etc.
Scotland noted that the DPP falls under the criminal law department and there is a budget specifically allocated for the DPP’s office to hire contract staff.
Honore-Paul said there are several Cabinet-approved positions, but the DPP’s office asked for permanent persons and Cabinet agreed that contract officers did not work for the DPP’s office and agreed they should get 100 permanent legal staff.
Scotland said in the meantime the DPP’s office, as “stop-gap measure”, can hire contract staff.
Honore-Paul said there is need for permanent staff, and she noted the JLSC has been asked for 33 juniors and they supplied 16, with recruitment ongoing.
Gaspard said there is need for senior staff and there is no Cabinet approval for these positions.
