CONVICTED attorney Vincent Nelson's inability to practise law was not caused by any alleged breach of an indemnity agreement with Government, but because of 'his own criminal conduct.'
Nelson's mega-million claim for compensation has been broadsided by the State. In fact, it is being countered that any income he says he could earn as a tax attorney, could only be possible if he concealed his activities, and this he cannot recover a penny of the $96 million he is asking the State to pay him.
It is the contention of former attorney general Faris Al-Rawi that when Nelson entered into the agreement with the Government, to provide evidence against Ramlogan and Ramdeen, he was already out of practice because of ill health.
Additionally, Nelson's claims that Al-Rawi promised him immunity from prosecution and a conditional pardon, if he testified, were also rubbished.
In fact, the only admission was consensus that there was an indemnity agreement entered into in November 2017, on Government's behalf between Nelson and Al-Rawi in exchange for Nelson's evidence of criminal acts relating to the payment of legal fees for State briefs.
Al-Rawi, the current Rural Development and Local Government Minister, admitted Nelson was an informer/whistleblower but added he (Nelson) was acting as a co-conspirator and expressed a willingness to give evidence against other lawyers both in TT and in London, one of who is a King's Counsel.
Insisting that Nelson had his own independent legal advice, Al-Rawi maintains it was agreed that Nelson's statement would be disclosed to the DPP and police, and that everyone was aware that it was possible the DPP would not accept any recommendation from him (Al-Rawi) not to prosecute Nelson.
Al-Rawi's defence is that it was a fact that once criminal proceedings began against Nelson, it would be published and there was always the likelihood that Nelson would be removed from Chambers; there would be disciplinary proceedings in all jurisdictions he practised law; as well as investigations by foreign criminal agencies and tax authorities.
Al-Rawi admitted to police Nelson provided the first draft of the now controversial agreement. Negotiations between the parties commenced because of Nelson's insistence that he get assurances he will not be prosecuted.
Al-Rawi said he communicated to Nelson's local attorney, Roger Kawalsingh that he could not grant Nelson immunity from prosecution, as that was for the DPP and, at best, he could only make a recommendation.
Nelson's recommendation of immunity from prosecution was initially removed from the proposed agreement and a final clause (clause 4) only says Al-Rawi would make a recommendation to the DPP, and nothing more.
Last week, Al-Rawi said he received advice from two senior counsels - Douglas Mendes and Gilbert Peterson - who negotiated the agreement with Nelson on his behalf.
Al-Rawi admitted to exchanging WhatsApp messages with Kawalsingh but said he no longer has a record of those messages.
Nelson's complaint that his statement wa
