AN INJUNCTION which temporarily halted promotions to the post of vice chief of defence staff (VCDS) has been lifted.
On Thursday, Justice Frank Seepersad discharged the injunction he granted last week to Lt Col Josette McLean and Dexter Metiver, who claim they have been bypassed for promotion.
In their lawsuit, the two complained that two junior officers were appointed to act as VCDS, ahead of them.
In his ruling on whether the injunction should continue, Seepersad said the two senior Defence Force officers did not convince the court that it should. He said there was some delay in bringing the matter to court since one of the current acting VCDS, Wing Commander Kemba Hannays, had been in the acting position since May 2022, but there was no challenge to her transfer from the Regiment to the Air Guard, where she is acting commanding officer.
"The evidence establishes that Wing Commander Hannays had been acting in the position of commanding officer for the AirGuard since on or about May of 2022.
"No prior action was taken to either challenge her transfer to the Air Guard or her subsequent acting positions and the record established that she has acted in the role of commanding officer and then previously as VCDS and those appointments were unchallenged.
"From a simple perspective of delay it cannot be that having been appointed to act as an acting commanding officer in May of 2022, an action is now being mounted to challenge that process," said the judge.
However, the judge agreed there were issues that should be resolved at trial involving the promotion process and the transfer of officers to various formations in the Defence Force of the Regiment, Coast Guard and Air Guard.
“There are triable issues that can involve the holder of the Office of the Chief of Defence Staff and in particular, as it relates to the correlation between that office and decisions to effect acting promotions either within formations and or in relation to the issue of acting command positions within the various formations.
"There is also evidently for the court to make a determination as to the manner in which the order of the precedent list is utilised as it relates to various appointments because, on the face of the evidence, there seems to be no absolute clarity in position as it relates to the process to be used to determine which officer is more senior when two or more commanding officers have the same date of appointment in their substantive post," he said.
He also removed the Defence Council as an interested party in the matter, saying that body had no role in the appointment of officers to commanding positions.
Such appointments are made by the Minister of National Security who, in consultation with the Prime Minister, would advise the President.
Instead, he directed that the Minister of National Security be joined as the interested party to assist the court.
"Invariably, if the court determines the substantive issues, then certain declaratory relief can be awarded in favour of the claimants and there can be
