Friday, January 19, 2018

Leak not from DPP’s office

The Attorney General is questioning the findings of the report of the Police Complaints Authority (PCA) based on the leaking of the document to a political party.

He said the leak raised the question of whether it was a political report. “Was there an ulterior political motive which seeped into and affects the contents and findings. Those are the issues that would arise in determining why it was leaked,” he said.

He was responding to a query as to why he did not appear to be concerned that Gavin Heerah, who occupies a sensitive and significant National Security position was deemed to be culpable in the investigations on the establishment and operations of the New Flying Squad Investigative Unit.

Ramlogan said when a document like this is leaked and the “contents appear politically biased because it clears (former national security minister) Jack Warner, saying he is guilty of no wrongdoing and “seeks to pin the donkey tail on his adviser (Gavin Heerah), currently Head of the National Operation Centre Unit, in the context of a Westminster system of constitutional governance where no adviser can act with autonomy but rather on the instructions of his minister... In such circumstances it raises political suspicion about the report itself,” the Attorney General said. 

He said it was the report from the Police Complaints Authority, not the report from the Police Service, which cleared Warner.

“So when you raise the issue of the contents of the report, you begin to get even more concerned and alarmed as to why a report clearing a senior political figure, who is the leader of a party and there are rumours about that party’s relationship with the PNM (People’s National Movement) as to whether they are working in secret against the Government to bring it down, whether the ILP (Independent Liberal Party) is in bed with the PNM, and the report is leaked to the PNM which clears the ILP party...and we all know that the adviser does not work in a vacuum. So when you connect the dots, it leaves one to wonder, how, why, when, where.”

The Attorney General said his dealings with the Director of Public Prosecution “leaves me in no doubt whatsoever” that the leak could not have come from the office of the DPP. 

“The DPP has far more sensitive documents than this with national security implications and it has never been leaked to anyone,” Ramlogan told reporters. 

“Based on my professional and personal dealings with the DPP’s office, I know that the leak did not occur there,” he added.

That leaves therefore the Police Complaints Authority and the Police Service. Ramlogan said the leak could only have emanated “from the top of the institution, not the bottom”.

Ramlogan said two reports done by the independent bodies separately in the New Flying Squad Investigative Unit should only have gone to two destinations—PM as head of the National Security Council and the Director of Public Prosecutions. “When the report is leaked to a political party, it has obvious implications for national security,” he said.

Told that PNM senators noted the statement of documents which came in the mailbox was a statement coined by UNC (United National Congress) MPs during their time in opposition, when they got confidential documents and information, the Attorney General said, “We are not dealing with the past. We are dealing with the present.”

Whether it was treasonous not to have the document would depend on how it came into Al- Rawi’s possession, the AG noted. 

He also noted that Al-Rawi changed his story about how he came into possession of the report, saying at first it came in his mailbox and then when he was told that it was virtually impossible unless “the mailbox was as large as a dustbin”, he (Al-Rawi) said someone left the report in his office. 

“The two can’t be true...and Senator Al-Rawi cannot contradict himself with impunity,” the Attorney General stated. 

“Didn’t he go to his secretary and ask ‘Who left these documents. Is it Mr Bakr? Was it a priest?’” Ramlogan said.