NONE of the 13 ex-board members of the Sport Company of TT (SporTT) or its former CEO is accused of corruption or personally benefiting from the controversial LifeSport programme.

SporTT’s corporate secretary Arlene George made this admission on September 11 when she returned to face questions from the ex-directors’ and CEO’s attorneys.

She was being questioned by attorney Anthony Vieira, SC, who said he adopted the points raised by attorneys Fyard Hosein, SC, and Jagdeo Singh on the first day of the trial of SporTT’s negligence claim against the 14.

SporTT’s claim of negligence is against its former CEO John Mollenthiel and ex-directors Sebastian Paddington, Chlea Lamsee-Ebanks, Reynold Bala, Morris Blanc, Nisa Dass, Anly Gopeesingh, Sabrenah Khayyam, Cheemattee Martin, Matthew Quamina, Annan Ramnansingh, Kent Samlal, Harnarine Seeram Singh and Milton Siboo over a $34 million contract to eBeam Interact Ltd for literacy and numeracy services.

George said she had no vested interest in the outcome of the case, but admitted it affected the lives and reputation of the 14.

She said she was there to give “honest and fair evidence.”

In response to Vieira’s questions, she confirmed there was no corruption allegation against the 14, nor was there an allegation they acted outside of their powers, resulting in personal financial gain at the company’s expense, nor had they acted dishonestly.

She admitted the crux of the claim was to get back the $34 million, and a breach of fiduciary duty on the part of the former directors and CEO.

George said she couldn’t say if the LifeSport issue was one of political interest, and said she did not find it necessary to contact former sport minister Anil Roberts for answers, as he was alleged to be intimately involved in the programme.

George was questioned extensively on the state enterprises performance manual, with which agencies such as SporTT are under an obligation to comply, although it is not a feature of the Companies Act.

She was also accused of providing “select imformation” in SporTT’s claim, since she was questioned by several attorneys on steps she took to get information from outside the company, including from the ministry and the LifeSport committee.

When the trial began on Tuesday, SporTT’s attorney Colin Kangaloo, SC, admitted the lawsuit was “one of documents.”

“The documents tell the full story.”

He urged Rahim to look at the documentation provided “and see what they say to determine the standard of the behaviour of the directors.”

He said the 14 breached their fiduciary duties and were negligent, as there was no justification for approving an eBeam sole-select contract. He also said all 14 had a duty of care which they breached when they did not thoroughly question the contract.

“No one picked up on the errors (in the contract) or asked questions.”

He said none of the directors saw the $34 million contract before it was entered or knew of its terms.

On August 21, SporTT was successful in its claim for restitution against eBeam for the