Raphael John-Lall

He was speak­ing yes­ter­day on the fifth day of the eleventh ses­sion of the Cli­co/HCU En­quiry at the Win­sure Build­ing, Port-of-Spain.On Fri­day Col­man said PWC had "failed to co-op­er­ate" be­cause re­ports they gave to the Com­mis­sion was "a few months late."

Yes­ter­day, how­ev­er, Col­man said, "Dis­turb­ing mat­ters have come to my at­ten­tion since we arose yes­ter­day. Those mat­ters re­fer to the dis­clo­sure of doc­u­ments by PWC and these doc­u­ments which have emerged since the end of the hear­ing yes­ter­day are in re­sponse to a di­rec­tion which I had pre­vi­ous­ly giv­en in re­spect to dis­clo­sure to ma­te­ri­als giv­en which might be de­scribed as the 'post-mortem' in De­cem­ber 2008.

"This was the time when the 2007 au­di­tors re­port was signed off and it is an ab­solute­ly cru­cial pe­ri­od in re­la­tion to the de­vel­op­ments of in­for­ma­tion and is cen­tral to the en­quiry. The ref­er­ence to 'mortem' sets up cer­tain warn­ing lights among those that are con­cerned with the in­ves­ti­ga­tion and facts."He added that it has on­ly now come to light that there was a "de­tailed dis­cus­sion" con­cern­ing events just be­fore CL Fi­nan­cial's col­lapse and now there are doc­u­ments to prove it.

"What has now emerged is that there was a de­tailed dis­cus­sion ap­par­ent­ly about what had hap­pened in re­la­tion to Caribbean In­vest­ment Bank (CIB) and CLF and in re­la­tion to the con­duct of the au­dit work which was be­ing done in re­la­tion to the group. There has been, since those doc­u­ments emerged, an in­di­ca­tion that cer­tain is­sues are con­tin­u­ing in re­la­tion to the pos­si­bil­i­ty of fur­ther doc­u­ments on this sub­ject and the prod­uct of these search­es will be dis­played if and when this ma­te­r­i­al be­comes avail­able."

Last Tues­day, when the 11th ses­sion of the en­quiry be­gan, PWC se­nior part­ner Col­in Wharf gave ev­i­dence and Col­man in­formed that the new doc­u­ments re­quire Wharf re­turn­ing to give more ev­i­dence."I take the view with re­gard to the ev­i­dence that Mr Wharf gave and with re­gard to the con­tent of the ma­te­r­i­al that has been dis­closed, it is ab­solute­ly un­avoid­able that the en­quiry should now re­call Mr Wharf to give ev­i­dence. He will there­fore be called to give ev­i­dence at 9.30 am on Mon­day morn­ing.

"In the mean­time, if there are fur­ther doc­u­ments that emerge of the same sub­ject they must be im­me­di­ate­ly be giv­en to the sub­ject and Mr Wharf must be pre­pared to deal with any such doc­u­ments. In the course of his ev­i­dence, Mr Wharf was asked very specif­i­cal­ly in what was de­scribed as a post-mortem in De­cem­ber 2008."The post-mortem meet­ing was some­thing to do with CL Fi­nan­cial. It was not clear from the ma­te­r­i­al dis­played at that stage and was de­scribed as the post-mortem meet­ing," Col­man said.