Derek Achong

Gladys Gafoor, the sus­pend­ed deputy chair­man of the In­tegri­ty Com­mis­sion, was yes­ter­day grant­ed leave to con­tin­ue her ju­di­cial re­view suit against four fel­low mem­bers of the com­mis­sion. How­ev­er, though he grant­ed leave for the ju­di­cial re­view ap­pli­ca­tion, Jus­tice Vashiest Kokaram in­struct­ed that both par­ties meet in the com­pa­ny of their at­tor­neys to at­tempt to rec­ti­fy the mat­ter with­out it be­ing heard be­fore the courts.

Kokaram said: "The com­mis­sion is still with­out a deputy chair­man...Its work is clear­ly ham­pered. "This is not good for a body that deals with se­ri­ous is­sues like in­tegri­ty." The meet­ing was sched­uled to take place at a date be­tween April 27 and May 18 at the Hall of Jus­tice, Port-of-Spain. As part of grant­i­ng Gafoor leave, Kokaram or­dered that all doc­u­ments be­ing dis­closed by the com­mis­sion to at­tor­neys in the mat­ter should be kept strict­ly con­fi­den­tial and should not be pub­lished by the press.

Kokaram said a breach of the or­der would amount to a con­tempt of court. Gafoor is ques­tion­ing a de­ci­sion by mem­bers of the com­mis­sion, last year, forc­ing her to re­cuse her­self from an in­ves­ti­ga­tion in­to for­mer At­tor­ney Gen­er­al John Je­re­mie. While grant­i­ng Gafoor leave to chal­lenge the In­tegri­ty Com­mis­sion, Kokaram struck out the of­fice of the At­tor­ney Gen­er­al and the in­di­vid­ual mem­bers of the com­mis­sion as par­ties list­ed in the ac­tion. De­liv­er­ing le­gal sub­mis­sions on be­half of the At­tor­ney Gen­er­al, at­tor­ney Jagdeo Singh told the court his client was not a prop­er par­ty to the mat­ter, cit­ing sev­er­al re­cent­ly de­cid­ed Privy Coun­cil cas­es as prece­dent. Sim­i­lar­ly, Se­nior Coun­sel for the com­mis­sion Deb­o­rah Peake cit­ed sec­tion 13 of the In­tegri­ty in Pub­lic Life Act, which states that in­di­vid­ual mem­bers of the com­mis­sion can­not be held li­able for de­ci­sions tak­en by the com­mis­sion. Gafoor, in her ap­pli­ca­tion, is call­ing on the court to quash a de­ci­sion tak­en last De­cem­ber 19 that she should re­cuse her­self from a mat­ter in­volv­ing Je­re­mie. Je­re­mie had writ­ten to the com­mis­sion ask­ing for Gafoor and an­oth­er com­mis­sion­er-char­tered ac­coun­tant Se­u­nar­ine Jokhoo-to be re­moved from all con­sid­er­a­tion of his mat­ter, her ap­pli­ca­tion stat­ed.

The oth­er mem­bers of the com­mis­sion are Ken Gor­don (chair­man), Prof Ann-Marie Bisses­sar and Neil Rol­ing­son. Gafoor is al­so re­quest­ing dis­clo­sure of the spe­cif­ic al­le­ga­tions against her. She is al­so seek­ing ag­gra­vat­ed and/or ex­em­plary dam­ages for "se­ri­ous dam­age to my pro­fes­sion­al rep­u­ta­tion and in­tegri­ty." Gafoor, who was ap­point­ed to the post in 2009, was sus­pend­ed on Feb­ru­ary 9 by the Pres­i­dent, who then ap­point­ed a three-mem­ber tri­bunal to probe the al­le­ga­tions against her. Par­al­lel to the ju­di­cial re­view ap­pli­ca­tion is a con­sti­tu­tion­al mo­tion which Gafoor filed against Pres­i­dent George Maxwell Richards. She is chal­leng­ing his de­ci­sion to sus­pend her and to ap­point the tri­bunal.

Ac­cord­ing to her ap­pli­ca­tion, the de­ci­sion to sus­pend her was made af­ter the Pres­i­dent re­ceived "three se­cret let­ters" from mem­bers of the com­mis­sion. Gafoor claims the let­ters were nev­er dis­closed to her. Ap­pear­ing for Gafoor in both mat­ters are at­tor­neys Clive Phelps and Nicole De Ver­teuil-Milne. At­tor­ney Mar­tin George al­so ap­peared on be­half of the At­tor­ney Gen­er­al. Sub­mis­sions in both mat­ters are ex­pect­ed to con­tin­ue on May 24.