After an almost year-long investigation, Genevieve Jodhan has resigned as CEO of Angostura.
Her resignation was submitted to the company on April 10 but carried an effective date of April 4.
The company has appointed Executive Manager-Operations Ian Forbes to act as CEO as the company begins the process to find a suitable replacement.
Jodhan, who was accused of flouting the company’s procurement policy in the award of several security contracts after two separate audits. She will receive a one-off payment representing her outstanding salary and perks.
Jodhan, 53, who has been on administrative leave since last October, was the subject of two separate audits which examined the award of contracts amounting to over one million dollars to MH Tactical Response Group, New Order Security Services and Corporate Asset Protection — all aligned to Sgt Mark Hernandez, a key member of the Special Operations Response Team, an elite unit of the T&T Police Service.
Angostura is one of the crown jewels acquired by the State after the 2009 bailout of the CL Financial Group. It is a publicly traded company and makers of the world-renowned Angostura Aromatic Bitters and a host of premium rums, including 1919.
Accounting firm PriceWaterhouseCoopers was called in to investigate the award of several contracts in mid-2018. The company also conducted its own probe.
In October 2018, Jodhan said she was aware that “there is an investigation into procurement practices initiated as a consequence of a complaint made through the company’s Whistle Blower Process, and expects that this investigation will be fair, and completed expeditiously.”
She said then that as the CEO of a publicly traded company, she “has always held the interest and welfare of all employees and stakeholders in mind in the conduct of the company’s business and will continue to so do.” Jodhan also defended her actions, saying they were lawful and in keeping with the procurement policy of the company.
While Jodhan was empowered to authorise contracts up to the sum of $500,000 without board approval, the contracts under review exceeded that sum and were not in keeping with a directive of the board. According to the company’s procurement practice, it was usual to invite three tenders for public contracts to ensure transparency.