ATTORNEY GENERAL Reginald Armour, SC, will not be answering any of the Law Association’s questions on events which precipitated the now-controversial collapse of the criminal prosecution of former attorney general Anand Ramlogan, SC, and ex-UNC senator Gerald Ramdeen.
On Friday, the association had six questions for the attorney general on the role of his predecessor Faris Al-Rawi; the payment of fees to convicted whistleblower King’s Counsel Vincent Nelson; and the indemnity agreement signed between Nelson and the Government.
On Sunday, Armour wrote to the association’s president Sophia Chote, SC, “out of respect” for the important pivotal national role and function of the association.
Armour said he has already voiced his concerns and will “say no more.”
“I will not be responding to that media statement in the public domain.”
He also said he has already spoken on the issue.
“As Attorney General, on the 10th October 2022, I have already stated my concern that the criminal prosecution was discontinued; that I am committed to protecting the public interest and that I will be taking advice going forward.
“This I am doing. With respect, I say no more.”
Armour, a former president of the association, did vocalise another concern of his: “A narrative building in the public domain which appears designed by some to pre-empt the director (of Public Prosecutions) from reinstating the discontinued prosecution against Messrs Ramlogan and Ramdeen when his witness becomes available.
“I consider it wholly inappropriate to engage in any public debate and do not propose to join the ongoing public narrative.”
Armour also expressed his astonishment that the association “issued such a public statement in the first place.
“More so, to issue a call for me, as Attorney General, to engage in a public discussion of very serious issues which are clearly governed by the sub- judice rule and which potentially may influence or impact the outcome of those proceedings.”
He also reminded the association that as AG, his office was the defendant in Nelson’s civil claim for $100 million for an alleged breach of the indemnity agreement and the association’s own position on the sub-judice rule, on October 19, 2021, when it sought to chastise the prime minister for statements he made involving the civil claim over the bail-for-murder law.
In its statement on Friday, the association, after a two-week silence, said it had refrained, over the last two weeks, from commenting so far because “each day has disclosed even more startling revelations.”
It also said it was unable at present to comment on all of the issues, but had questions for Armour, warning that the absence of a full and robust explanation and response from him would "encourage speculation of wrongdoing or covering up of wrongdoing."
It also said it was not in a position to determine whether there “has been corruption, misfeasance in public office or politically motivated prosecution of any public official, politician or attorney.”
“High public office holders
