An­na-Lisa Paul

At­tor­neys rep­re­sent­ing the de­fen­dants in the Pi­ar­co II In­quiry were yes­ter­day de­nied a five-month ad­journ­ment af­ter Mag­is­trate Ejen­ny Es­pinet or­dered them to reap­pear be­fore her next Fri­day, to pro­vide an up­date fol­low­ing a sched­uled High Court ap­pear­ance on Mon­day.

The Oc­to­ber ad­journ­ment was re­quest­ed by Queen's Coun­sel Ed­ward Fitzger­ald as he re­vealed that at­tor­neys were set to re­turn to the Court of Ap­peal on Mon­day, in re­la­tion to two ap­pli­ca­tions which in­clude a re­quest for an ex­pe­dit­ed hear­ing for the sub­stan­tive Sec­tion 34 mat­ter cur­rent­ly be­fore the court and al­so, for a stay of the pro­ceed­ings at the mag­is­trates court, pend­ing the out­come of the high court mat­ter.

Fitzger­ald, who rep­re­sents busi­ness­man Steve Fer­gu­son, was sup­port­ed in his ap­pli­ca­tion be­fore Es­pinet in the Port-of-Spain Fourth Court, by An­drew Mitchell, QC who ap­peared on be­half of Ish­war Gal­barans­ingh and Am­rith Ma­haraj, and Sophia Chote, SC, who rep­re­sents Ameer Edoo.Fitzger­ald said the hear­ing of the Sec­tion 34 ap­pli­ca­tion was sched­uled for Oc­to­ber 4.

Af­ter his ear­li­er sug­ges­tion for an ad­journ­ment to Oc­to­ber was re­ject­ed, Fitzger­ald pro­posed a short ad­journ­ment to Ju­ly, in or­der to al­low for the Court of Ap­peal's de­ci­sion.He said it was a "prac­ti­cal" so­lu­tion as it would be dif­fi­cult for Es­pinet to rule on mat­ters that might still be pend­ing be­fore the Court of Ap­peal, as he stressed that he was not ask­ing for a stay of the mat­ter, but rather a lengthy ad­journ­ment.

Chote re­mind­ed the court that there was still a "live Sec­tion 34 ap­pli­ca­tion be­fore the High Court," as she too agreed Es­pinet would be con­sid­er­ing the same is­sues as the Court of Ap­peal.Mitchell said it was "in­ap­pro­pri­ate" for Es­pinet to con­tin­ue the in­quiry at this time as there was a pend­ing Sec­tion 34 ap­pli­ca­tion be­fore the High Court, as he point­ed out the length of time the in­quiry was tak­ing and the costs be­ing in­curred by both the de­fen­dants and the State.

Pe­ter­son said fol­low­ing the hear­ing on Mon­day, at­tor­neys could re­turn to court next week, fol­low­ing which they would be able to con­tin­ue the in­quiry, as it would be enough time to al­low for the Court of Ap­peal's de­ci­sion.At­tor­ney An­nette Mam­chan, who rep­re­sent­ed the Mar­itime Com­pa­ny, said they al­so in­tend­ed to file an ap­peal.The mat­ter was lat­er ad­journed to May 10.

The ac­cused in the Pi­ar­co In­quiry in­clude for­mer Fi­nance min­is­ter Bri­an Kuei-Tung; for­mer Works min­is­ter Sadiq Baksh; Ty­rone Gopee and Ameer Edoo; for­mer client rep­re­sen­ta­tive in the Min­istry of Works at the air­port project Pe­ter Cateau; for­mer Air­ports Au­thor­i­ty ex­ec­u­tive Am­rith Ma­haraj; for­mer Mar­itime Fi­nan­cial Group ex­ec­u­tive Steve Fer­gu­son; and chair­man of North­ern Con­struc­tion Ltd Ish­war Gal­barans­ingh.