(Trinidad Express) Attorney General John Jeremie, back in Cabildo Chambers for a second term, attempted to push the former Director of Public Prosecu-tions (DPP), Geoffrey Henderson, now a High Court judge, to charge powerful political and corporate players under criminal investigation in 2006, including Opposition Leader Basdeo Panday and businessman Lawrence Duprey.
The then DPP, now Justice Henderson, stood firm and accused Jeremie of attempting to interfere with the integrity and transparency of the criminal justice system.
Correspondence obtained by the Sunday Express shows the then Attorney General telling Henderson that the State had spent considerable sums conducting corruption probes into Desalcott and Proman and that his failure to charge named individuals was “untenable.“
In his letter of November 3, 2006 to the then DPP, Jeremie said: “I remind you that the State has expended considerable sums on both the Proman and Desalcott matters. “In respect of the latter I close by pointing out to you that the additional charge suggested by Peter Thornton, QC several months ago has not been laid. This too is an untenable state of affairs bearing in mind recent events in which it is alleged that a certain prominent judicial officer is said to have deprecated a particular charge of a prominent person in public life on the basis that the charge was laid at a time when elections were in the air.”
Then DPP Henderson, on November 9, 2006 responded that criminal investigations should be allowed to continue along the usual process. On the Attorney General’s complaint that he failed to institute criminal proceedings against Opposition Leader Basdeo Panday and executive chairman of the CL Financial Group Lawrence Duprey, Henderson said: “I accept that I did not reply to your letter dated April 28, 2006. Your letter to me contained advice provided to you by an eminent Senior Counsel. This advice was unsolicited.”
Henderson noted: “That advice recommended that criminal charges be laid against Mr Basdeo Panday and Mr Lawrence Duprey. At that time I was not satisfied that charges could properly be laid. This view was also held by Sir Timothy Cassel, QC who led the prosecution in the Panday trial, the matter in which Duprey gave evidence for the defence.”
Henderson said for reasons that he was not prepared to discuss, the investigation was still not complete and therefore, “charges cannot be laid.” Stating that he was not insensitive to the fact that the State had expended considerable sums on the investigation, he noted: “That is not the test to be applied in considering whether or not to institute criminal proceedings against a person suspected of committing an offence.
“In this regard, and with specific reference to your letters of April 28, 2006 and August 25, 2006, I would be failing in my independent duty under the constitution if I were to initiate a charge under your direction where the investigations are incomplete.”
With respect to the prosecution of persons allegedly involved in bid rigging related to the Desalcott probe, Henderson said: “Mr Thornton QC is advising on the amendments himself. Mr Thornton QC has promised to supply any amendments and/or further charges when he returns to Trinidad in time for his court appearance.”
Jeremie responded on November 27, 2006, making clear that it was his “understanding” that British QCs, Thornton and Cassel had given the “go ahead” in the respective matters. He said: “In the case of Sir Timothy this was done in my presence close to a fortnight ago. In spite of that absolutely no progress has been made. Perhaps it is time for less talk and greater action in defence of the public interest.
“I should remind you in this regard that you have been at the helm of your department for over four years. It does not lie within your mouth in my view to lay criticism against the criminal justice system in circumstances in which Sharma C.J. has pointed to the deficiency in terms of skills against experienced defence counsel.” On what appeared to have been a bone of contention between the two, Jeremie pointed to his attempts to provide senior counsel in matters of public importance. “If I might be permitted to close by remarking on the development of the human resource capital of the department. Quite frankly this is none of your business. In the midst of a crime wave the political directorate cannot tell the people of Trinidad and Tobago that an acquittal was due to a learning exercise.”
