Dissident LATT attorney: I trust Sturge’s political acumen AND support Armour


Attorney Jonathan Bhagan, one of 30 signatories on a no confidence motion against Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago (LATT) president Reginald Armour SC and vice-president Gerry Brooks, confirmed today that he was not misled into signing the controversial requisition by UNC Senator Wayne Sturge.

“Mr Sturge did not attempt to mislead me in any way despite allegations from other signatories that they were mislead,” said Bhagan, via a media statement. “I placed trust in Mr Sturge’s political acumen that such a move was necessary to bring certain issues to light in order to preserve the fabric of our democracy.”

Photo: UNC Senator and attorney Wayne Sturge.
Photo: UNC Senator and attorney Wayne Sturge.

However, Bhagan simultaneously claimed to “full confidence” in Armour’s leadership of the LATT. His statement, which was emailed to the media, was ostensibly meant to clarify his role in the motion that was quashed yesterday at a special general meeting without even getting off the ground.

The requisition, which was served to the LATT council on 30 June 2016, had two parts:

  1. To call upon the President of the Law Association Mr Reginald Armour SC and the Vice President Mr Gerry Brooks to disclose to the members of the Law Association whether any substantive position was articulated to the Honourable Attorney General Mr Faris Al-Rawi, MP on behalf of the Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago regarding the Strategic Services Agency (Amendment) Bill 2016 and if so what was articulated to the Honourable Attorney General? And if not, why not?
  2. To move a motion for a vote of No Confidence in the President of the Law Association Mr Reginald Armour S.C. and the Vice President Mr Gerry Brooks for failing to consult with the membership of the Law Association to obtain its views on the Strategic Services Agency (Amendment) Bill 2016 prior to meeting with the Honourable Attorney General being a Bill of grave public importance regarding the constitutional rights of citizens.

However, the LATT pointed out that its response to the SSA Bill was guided by research from committee members Ravi Rajcoomar and Rishi Dass on 11 April and discussed in a Council meeting on 12 April while, after meeting Attorney General Faris Al-Rawi, Armour and Brooks reported back to its executive members on 14 April and 10 May.

Photo: Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago (LATT) president Reginald Armour SC talks at the Transparency Institute anti-corruption conference on 8 March 2016. (Copyright Shaun Rambaran/forge.co.tt)
Photo: Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago (LATT) president Reginald Armour SC talks at the Transparency Institute anti-corruption conference on 8 March 2016.
(Copyright Shaun Rambaran/forge.co.tt)

The Law Association’s response and the publication of the unhappy attorneys saw 12 of the original 30 signatories officially abandon the motion—and at least nine attorneys claimed to have been misled by Sturge.

The attorneys who abandoned the requisition are: Ravi Rajcoomar, Alisa Khan, Shivana Nath, Irshaad Ali, Adam Razack, Shivonne Francis, Indarjit Seuraj, Seana Baboolal, Brent Hallpike, Makeda Browne-Alfred, Jerry Lee Ramkissoon-David and UNC legal advisor Collin Partap.

The attorneys who have not distanced themselves from the controversial motion are:

Wayne Sturge, Alexia Romero, Joseph Sookoo, Danielle Rampersad, Kevin Lewis, Shirvani Ramkissoon, Abigail Roach-Thomas, Shanice Edwards, Jonathan Bhagan, Devesh Ramdeo, Jennifer Rogers, Alvin Pariagsingh, Jayanti Lutchmedial, Anand Ramlogan, Kent Samlal, Douglas Bayley and Gerald Ian Ramdeen.

Neither Sturge nor fellow UNC Senator Gerald Ramdeen defended the requisition at yesterday’s LATT special general meeting while fellow instigators, ex-Attorney General Anand Ramlogan and ex-UNC Senator Robin Montano, stayed away.

Photo: Former Attorney General Anand Ramlogan. (Courtesy HeritageRadioTT)
Photo: Former Attorney General Anand Ramlogan.
(Courtesy HeritageRadioTT)

Bhagan was absent too but he explained that his absence was due to his bout with the Zika virus and he stood by his initial position. Yet, paradoxically, he claimed to be “assured” that the motion failed.

“I signed the petition with full knowledge of its contents, however I did orally express a reservation to Mr Wayne Sturge that Mr Armour, SC had not done anything to warrant a motion of no confidence,” said Bhagan. “(…) I had noted the withdrawals from the motion of no confidence and I felt assured that even in my absence, the motion would fail.

“I was also recovering from symptoms associated with the Zika virus and did not consider it expedient to attend the meeting.

“I was, however, encouraged by my colleagues in the legal fraternity, and motivated by my good conscience, to release a clarifying statement, due to the seriousness of the matter at hand.”

Bhagan attempted to explain his apparent contradiction by claiming that his support for the requisition, which included a no confidence motion, was his way of encouraging debate on the SSA Bill.

Photo: Trinidad and Tobago attorney Jonathan Bhagan.
Photo: Trinidad and Tobago attorney Jonathan Bhagan.

“I had hoped that it would result in a debate on the implications of the Strategic Services Agency (SSA) Amendment Bill 2016 and the way it impacted the constitutional rights of Trinidad and Tobago’s citizens.

“I am of the firm view that such legislation can only be justifiable in Trinidad and Tobago if the Police Service and National Security apparatus undergo adequate reform. Further, I believe that the oversight of an independent body would be necessary to prevent manipulation and political victimisation by the Executive.”

Bhagan, like Sturge, claimed that his mind was put at ease following a release by the Law Association on 19 July. He did not offer comment on LATT’s statement that it discussed the matter with its Council on12 April and reported back to the body on 14 April and 10 May—almost two months before the requisition was put forward.

“A statement was subsequently released by the Law Association on 19 July via email regarding consultation on the SSA Bill,” stated Bhagan. “This statement satisfied me that the Law Association President and Vice President took the necessary steps to advise the Honourable Attorney General about issues regarding the failure of the Strategic Services Agency (SSA) Amendment Bill 2016 to properly insulate the SSA from potential manipulation by the Executive.”

Bhagan, who described Armour as a leader that demonstrated the greatest integrity, said he hoped for “peace and camaraderie” within the legal fraternity, as well full respect for freedom of thought and expression. He said he attempted to reach the Law Association President to personally explain his position on the requisition.

However, according to Bhagan, “the email was returned to my inbox unsent.”

Photo: Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago (LATT) president Reginald Armour SC (centre) meets and greets at the Transparency Institute anti-corruption conference on 8 March 2016. (Copyright Shaun Rambaran/forge.co.tt)
Photo: Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago (LATT) president Reginald Armour SC (centre) meets and greets at the Transparency Institute anti-corruption conference on 8 March 2016.
(Copyright Shaun Rambaran/forge.co.tt)

The following is the full statement from attorney Jonathan Bhagan:

Dear colleagues and esteemed members of the Bar,

This correspondence serves to clarify my position on the motion of no confidence raised against Mr Reginald Armour, SC and to explain my absence from the meeting, held on July 25th, 2016 as a result of same.

I signed the petition with full knowledge of its contents, however I did orally express a reservation to Mr Wayne Sturge that Mr Armour, SC had not done anything to warrant a motion of no confidence. Mr Sturge did not attempt to mislead me in any way despite allegations from other signatories that they were mislead. I placed trust in Mr Sturge’s political acumen that such a move was necessary to bring certain issues to light in order to preserve the fabric of our democracy.

Subsequent to my signing of the petition, I had attempted to contact Mr Armour via his personal Marie De Vere email address, to explain why I had signed, but due to unknown technical problems, the email was returned to my inbox unsent.

My deep interest in human rights advocacy and work with civil society had guided my decision to sign the aforementioned petition, as I had hoped that it would result in a debate on the implications of the Strategic Services Agency (SSA) Amendment Bill 2016 and the way it impacted the constitutional rights of Trinidad and Tobago’s citizens.

Photo: Attorney General Faris Al-Rawi.
Photo: Attorney General Faris Al-Rawi.

I am of the firm view that such legislation can only be justifiable in Trinidad and Tobago if the Police Service and National Security apparatus undergo adequate reform. Further, I believe that the oversight of an independent body would be necessary to prevent manipulation and political victimisation by the Executive.

Given global political instabilities, the crime situation and the large number of Trinidad and Tobago Citizens who have joined international terrorist organisations I considered the very real possibility of Trinidad and Tobago devolving into a police state with serious infringements on human rights becoming the norm.

A statement was subsequently released by the Law Association on 19 July via email regarding consultation on the SSA Bill. This statement satisfied me that the Law Association President and Vice President took the necessary steps to advise the Honourable Attorney General about issues regarding the failure of the Strategic Services Agency (SSA) Amendment Bill 2016 to properly insulate the SSA from potential manipulation by the Executive.

Given the fact that the SSA Amendment Bill had already been passed by the Parliament and assented to by the President I did not consider any contribution I could make at the Special General Meeting significant. I had been satisfied by the statement released by the Law Association on 19 July that the President and Vice President of the Law Association had done their due diligence and thus I had no major concerns to ventilate at the meeting.

Photo: Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago vice-president Gerry Brooks. (Copyright NGC)
Photo: Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago vice-president Gerry Brooks.
(Copyright NGC)

I had noted the withdrawals from the motion of no confidence and I felt assured that even in my absence, the motion would fail. I was also recovering from symptoms associated with the Zika virus and did not consider it expedient to attend the meeting.

I was, however, encouraged by my colleagues in the legal fraternity, and motivated by my good conscience, to release a clarifying statement, due to the seriousness of the matter at hand.

I apologise to the President and Vice-President of the Law Association for any inconvenience caused by my absence and in closing, express my full confidence in Mr Armour SC to lead the Law Association, as he has always demonstrated the greatest integrity.

I hope that despite the confusion that ensued, the Law Association can take this opportunity to repair divisions between the ranks of its membership and maintain peace and camaraderie.

I also hope that we maintain a society that has full respect for the right to Freedom of Thought and Expression as enshrined in our constitution. Despite the chaos that ensued as a result of this motion it shows that the Law Association remains a fundamental component of our democracy by permitting its members to express their concerns freely.

Regards,

Jonathan Bhagan,

Attorney At Law

 

Editor’s Note: Jonathan Bhagan requested, after Wired868’s publication of his letter, that—since the story is already published and will not be taken down—republication should be discouraged on advice of legal counsel.

More from Wired868
Noble: Is Griffith positioning himself as T&T’s J Edgar Hoover? Or Donald Trump?

“A lawless, indisciplined and corrupt nation cannot fight crime.” Pastor Clive Dottin, The People’s Roundtable, January 2024. At The People’s Read more

Daly Bread: Into the political hereafter; as Opposition Leader shows up Govt response to Privy Council

There is a new example of political truth being stranger than fiction. It is that it takes two very wobbly Read more

Daly Bread: Was AG looking for VAR? At least, Prime Minister responded sensibly

As football fans know, VAR stands for Video Assistant Referee. This is the additional refereeing team that uses technology located Read more

Daly Bread: Answers required for accountability in DPP imbroglio

Persons in public life frequently exercise power without accountability. As President Paula-Mae Weekes was recently demitting office, we were reminded Read more

Noble: When will we hold accountable those “honourable” members who lead?

“When a crime is not punished quickly, people feel it is safe to do wrong.” Ecclesiastes 8: 11 Last week’s Read more

Daly Bread: Ten thousand flowers bloom in panyards, but ole mas in Office of the AG

Trinidad and Tobago Television (TTT) has provided quality coverage of this season’s Panorama competitions, particularly through the engagement of knowledgeable Read more

About Lasana Liburd

Lasana Liburd is the managing director and chief editor at Wired868.com and a journalist with over 20 years experience at several Trinidad and Tobago and international publications including Play the Game, World Soccer, UK Guardian and the Trinidad Express.

Check Also

Noble: Is Griffith positioning himself as T&T’s J Edgar Hoover? Or Donald Trump?

“A lawless, indisciplined and corrupt nation cannot fight crime.” Pastor Clive Dottin, The People’s Roundtable, …

258 comments

  1. Mr Liburd there’s a note at the end of the letter that says it was sent-for publication-to media.

  2. Two words: excuses and incompetence.

  3. Boy GATE can’t be for everybody some people need a critical thinking test.

  4. Editor’s Note: Jonathan Bhagan requested, after Wired868’s publication of his letter, that—since the story is already published and will not be taken down—republication should be prohibited on advice of legal counsel.

  5. I was thinking the Zika did something to him, smh

  6. What dotishness Bhagan talking?
    Like the ZIKA virus attack his brain!

  7. That’s what he needed lol a button to tell him it’s a…….. There is a saying if you don’t stand for what is right then you will fall for anything. Just remember that in your though process.

  8. This boy is a kind a ass awa? All of them who bring that motion i hope people remember their names and black list them trouble makers and puppets.

  9. You trust Sturge because you is a damn UNC.

  10. It’s like testifying in court that yes I drove my masked friends to the bank, but they assured me the air condition in there is always turned up too high!

  11. Rhoda Bharath, when you asked Montano yesterday on air whether he was a financial member of the LATT, he lied and said “yes”.

  12. I was going and stay quiet inno…but is the way these lawyers feel all Trinis who not in the profession is ass.

  13. Rhoda I just glad I eh give you no chance tuh shit mih up ……. yet!

  14. Yes, yes, that’s sounds about right ?

  15. I was about to say that from my knowledge of Jonathan I have no doubt that he would have no reservations about accepting his signing of that document based largely on his belief in Sturge’s honor to be irresistible.
    But then the ironi dawned upon me!

  16. And considering that Robin Montano has publicly claimed he wrote the requisition letter…because his phones were tapped and he wanted answers…how exactly is your support and signing of the letter on the basis of Sturge’s acumen, Jonathan Bhagan?

  17. If that letter could quantify as manure, the Sahara would be fertile again. Big. Wet. Steups.
    You have reservations about part of an issue but sign off on it fully?
    And then the email didnt go through and the dog ate the homework and blah blah blah.
    #MissMeWithTheBS.

  18. Political acumen of Wayne Sturge? Really? #gullibleMUCH

  19. He is a contradiction unto himself. And the fact that he says he trusts in the political acumen of Mr Sturge( what manner of person follows this clown politically) and was never misled into signing up to oppose someone he says he respects and believe in speaks volumes as to his state of mind. People like these are very dangerous. They do things just because………..

  20. I’m glad that Jonathan said his piece because, while I understand where he’s coming from, wasn’t there ANY OTHER MEANS for this discussion to have come up? It’s like he got the choice to put his head or his tail in the mousetrap, fully knowing that the end game is being in the trap.
    I hate to say it, but this looks bad, but I can only talk from my limited scope.
    Wasn’t there a mechanism where he could’ve raised it DURING the motion’s deliberations so that at least some consensus could be reached by EVERYONE so Jonathan could keep his head and tail outside the trap?

  21. My grandmother used to say that “Anand and Sturge will kery yuh, buh dey wouldn bring yuh back”.

    Well maybe not my grandmother, but ah sure somebody grandmother say it!

  22. This person demonstrates the right skills to be an attorney-at-law. See if u can figure out what those are and decide for yourself if that is a good thing ?

  23. i warned you bro. dont drink from the poisoned chalice that is party politics masquerading as law association business

  24. Jonathan Bhagan, why did you sign a document that you didn’t agree to (in its entirety)?
    If someone offered me a cup of hot chocolate and a slap, I wouldn’t agree on the grounds that I like hot chocolate.

  25. Bookmarking this one too….the remaining 13 lawyers are on my black list.
    His purpose may be laudable but agreeing to do something so OBVIOUSLY heavy-loaded just to get that discussion across (save that he was absent where those were discussed, if at all) si a bit disingenuous in my view.
    You can’t say you want to have a (sort-of national) coup ONLY to open a (talk) shop where you want. That makes no sense, sir.

  26. To clarify i agreed with the first part of the requisition , calling for disclosure RE: SSA Amendment bill and any position articulated to the AG.

    I didn’t agree with the second part RE: Motion of no confidence.

    The full text of my letter is here.

    Re: Statement regarding the Law Association Special General Meeting Dated July 25th, 2016

    Dear colleagues and esteemed members of the Bar,

    This correspondence serves to clarify my position on the motion of no confidence raised against Mr. Reginald Armour, S.C. and to explain my absence from the meeting, held on July 25th, 2016 as a result of same.

    I signed the petition with full knowledge of its contents, however I did orally express a reservation to Mr. Wayne Sturge that Mr. Armour, S.C. had not done anything to warrant a motion of no confidence. Mr. Sturge did not attempt to mislead me in any way despite allegations from other signatories that they were mislead. I placed trust in Mr. Sturge’s political acumen that such a move was necessary to bring certain issues to light in order to preserve the fabric of our democracy.

    Subsequent to my signing of the petition, I had attempted to contact Mr. Armour via his personal Marie De Vere email address, to explain why I had signed, but due to unknown technical problems, the email was returned to my inbox unsent.

    My deep interest in human rights advocacy and work with civil society had guided my decision to sign the aforementioned petition, as I had hoped that it would result in a debate on the implications of the Strategic Services Agency (SSA) Amendment Bill 2016 and the way it impacted the constitutional rights of Trinidad and Tobago’s citizens.

    I am of the firm view that such legislation can only be justifiable in Trinidad and Tobago if the Police Service and National Security apparatus undergo adequate reform. Further, I believe that the oversight of an independent body would be necessary to prevent manipulation and political victimization by the Executive.

    Given global political instabilities , the crime situation and the large number of Trinidad and Tobago Citizens who have joined international terrorist organizations I considered the very real possibility of Trinidad and Tobago devolving into a police state with serious infringements on human rights becoming the norm.

    A statement was subsequently released by the Law Association on July 19th via email regarding consultation on the SSA Bill. This statement satisfied me that the Law Association President and Vice President took the necessary steps to advise the Hon. Attorney General about issues regarding the failure of the Strategic Services Agency (SSA) Amendment Bill 2016 to properly insulate the SSA from potential manipulation by the Executive.

    Given the fact that the SSA Amendment Bill had already been passed by the Parliament and assented to by the President I did not consider any contribution I could make at the Special General Meeting significant. I had been satisfied by the statement released by the Law Association on July 19th that the President and Vice President of the Law Association had done their due diligence and thus I had no major concerns to ventilate at the meeting.

    I had noted the withdrawals from the motion of no confidence and I felt assured that even in my absence, the motion would fail. I was also recovering from symptoms associated with the Zika virus and did not consider it expedient to attend the meeting.

    I was, however, encouraged by my colleagues in the legal fraternity, and motivated by my good conscience, to release a clarifying statement, due to the seriousness of the matter at hand.

    I apologize to the President and Vice-President of the Law Association for any inconvenience caused by my absence and in closing, express my full confidence in Mr. Armour. S.C. to lead the Law Association, as he has always demonstrated the greatest integrity.

    I hope that despite the confusion that ensued, the Law Association can take this opportunity to repair divisions between the ranks of its membership and maintain peace and camaraderie.

    I also hope that we maintain a society that has full respect for the right to Freedom of Thought and Expression as enshrined in our constitution. Despite the chaos that ensued as a result of this motion it shows that the Law Association remains a fundamental component of our democracy by permitting its members to express their concerns freely.

    Regards,

    Jonathan Bhagan

    Attorney At Law

    ( This statement was emailed to the Law Association and several media outlets on 26/7/2016.)

    • Confused much! Full confidence in the President of LATT and his VP yet you sign and endorse a motion of no confidence?? I think you should have just stayed quiet and stood by your initial action Jonathan Bhagan.

    • So wouldn’t it have made sense to simply decline signing the letter based on the 2nd motion if you didn’t agree to that part? Are you asking us to assume that you had confidence or took for granted that the no confidence motion would not be successful at the meeting? I’m not sure how to process that. Sounds like you’re flip flopping big time here now that the full details have been ventilated. Very shady indeed. Needless to say, this action does not inspire confidence in you as a legal practitioner. Consider yourself and the others blacklisted. There’s no way I would even consider you to represent me or anyone I know.

    • This is very shady…and even more so for a lawyer. What you telling me is that you will sign a document although you don’t agree with all the contents of the letter. As a lawyer I am sure you know that that kind of logic cannot stand up in court. Do you encourage your clients to sign documents that they do not agree to? Isn’t signing the document means that you agree with the entire document? This is just shady in my book

  27. Hmmm. We all know the saying about the law. Say I guess it’s been proven right or wrong go figure lo?

  28. “Meaningful silence is always better than meaningless words”

  29. I am afraid of some of these attorneys. They have no scruples. Imagine signing documents you did not read and following colleagues blindly. Changing your minds midway when information is flawed. Hello pull back. Your integrity would be questioned when dealing with international bodies. Lord help your clients.

  30. Well to my knowledge he has no kids so only time will tell!

  31. ..anyone I anykind of trouble should stay very far away from this lawyer if he’s will to represent the for FREE!….His argument unless the author has it wrong has no logic or common-sense to it…..I can now understand why the motion failed to get of the ground in the first place…DUNCE!

  32. I like Jonathan eh, and I’m happy that his signing of that document based on his trust in Wayne Sturge’s political acumen did not result in the Forfeiture of a kidney!

  33. What manner of horse crap did I just read

  34. Well yes. I wonder if that’s advice he gives his clients……

  35. is this comedy central? I now understand when people say they have been ripped off by lawyers , such as a friend who paid $120, 000 for a divorce, (ethics committee saw nothing was wrong when she pursued it ) or another who lost a piece land because of the exorbitant fee to his attorney to represent his son in a murder case, etc It would have been better if Mr Bhagan had said nothing, his version is so incredulous and we want more lawyers in this land. Are they all GATE recipients, this is to emphasis my point of tthe level of ertiary level education in T&T, where it is simply about quantity and not quality. This is sad when you think os former layers of esteem, such as Rbinson, Hudson Phillip, Clarke, Sobhion,, to the what is being generated presently

  36. Can a none lawyer break this down for me please. I don’t speak lawyer. Is it he saying they were half way pregnant ?

  37. I really don’t know where to start with this…
    In any case, heard one lawyer got up in the meeting and said they signed the requisition without reading it.
    Apparently said lawyer is now going before the disciplinary committee.

  38. Ok. So when the opening line says “I trust in Wayne Sturge’s political acumen” I am very trepidious about proceeding any further. ??

  39. What are the chances this piece will leave me exasperated Lasana.
    Ah need tuh know!

  40. But i thaught he is a lawyer I didn t know he was a clown….. he is in the wrong circus

  41. Definitely suffering from Zika

  42. We pay to educate that fella in anyway if so ah want my two cents back
    Remember these ppl years to come they are the same ones will be saying vote for me.

  43. Please allow me to add nothing substantial to the impending discussion, other than to dismiss this with a disdainful STEUPS.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.