Derek Achong
A former driver, assigned to the T&T Prison Service, has lost his lawsuit against acting Deputy Commissioner of Prisons Shamshudeen Mohammed for allegedly transferring him to the Carrera Island Prison after he (the driver) refused to offer him (Mohammed) a coconut he brought from home.
Delivering a written judgment on Friday, HIgh Court Judge Ricky Rahim rejected all the grounds raised in the judicial review and constitutional lawsuit brought by Dexter McDonald.
In 1996, McDonald, a public servant, was assigned to the Prison Service by the Public Service Commission.
On April 3, 2020, almost a year before McDonald was due to retire, he brought some coconuts to the Golden Grove Prison as was offering prison officers in the presence of Mohammed.
McDonald claimed that in jest he told Mohammed that he would not offer him on even if he asked.
McDonald contended that Mohammed made a veiled threat to transfer him to the offshore prison using a common term used by prison officers to describe the rocky island.
He claimed that Mohammed said: “I thought you were brilliant, I will see how smart you are while you are romancing the stone.”
Later that month, McDonald was transferred to prison to be on standby to drive an ambulance in the event that a prison officer or inmate requires medical treatment.
McDonald held the post for a few months before going on pre-retirement leave and eventually retiring in January, last year. Despite retiring, McDonald still continued the lawsuit over the issue.
In defence of the lawsuit, Mohammed did not deny having a conversation with McDonald on the day but claimed he made no threats but instead advised McDonald of the vacancy.
Mohammed also claimed that he was tasked with the responsibility of filling the temporary vacancy, introduced specifically because of the COVID-19 pandemic, by acting Prisons Commissioner Dennis Pulchan, who testified on his behalf.
In his judgment, Rahim ruled that Pulchan was permitted to delegate his power to reassign public officers under his purview to senior prison officers.
He also ruled that the decision to transfer McDonald was not unlawful despite him not receiving a lengthy notice period.
“Further, the explanation provided by the Commissioner of Prisons appears to support the contention that the services of the claimant were required as a matter of exigencies of the service so that those circumstances would not have permitted proper notice in writing,” Rahim said, as he noted that the vacancy arose at the start of the pandemic.
Rahim also ruled that the transfer was not an abuse of power because McDonald was not allowed to make representations before it was taken.
He noted that McDonald could have made the representations as to why he should not have been transferred after taking up the position.
“Should such representations have been made and properly considered, the decision to transfer may have been rescinded. There is no evidence of any such representations having been made by the claimant,” he said.
Rahim noted that McDonald failed to prove the transfer was based on the conversation over the coconut based on his analysis of both parties’ testimony.
“What remains may be suspicions that it was in fact the cause, but these must remain suspicions only as the evidence has not ascended into the realm of proof on a balance of probabilities,” Justice Rahim said.
He also ruled that the transfer was not a penalty as there was a legitimate vacancy.
Based on his findings in the case, Justice Rahim ruled that McDonald was not entitled to constitutional relief.
As part of his decision, Rahim ordered McDonald to pay 50 per cent of the legal costs incurred by Mohammed in defending the lawsuit.
—Derek Achong
