Former attorney general Anand Ramlogan’s professional reputation was called into question as he took the witness stand to defend himself in his defamation lawsuit against current Works and Infrastructure Minister Fitzgerald Hinds yesterday.
Hinds’ lawyer, Gregory Delzin, spent several hours criticising Ramlogan over his claims that his reputation was severely damaged by statements made by his client during a political meeting in Sangre Grande in May last year.
“I am suggesting to you that you come here and put yourself in high repute, when in truth and in fact this reputation was created by public relations,” Delzin said, as he accused Ramlogan of “inflating” in the lawsuit the impact of Hinds’ speech on his reputation.
In response, Ramlogan cited a series of high-profile cases he did during his career as a private attorney and claimed his track record as a lawyer had made him a household name.
“Not because you are a household name means that you are held in high esteem,” Delzin said.
Ramlogan’s lawsuit centres around claims made by Hinds that he (Ramlogan) was involved in corruption in relation of lawsuits brought by prisoners claiming to have been abused by prison officers which were settled by the Office of the Attorney General before the case went on trial.
Hinds also alleged on the platform that Ramlogan attempted to influence improperly former Solicitor General Eleanor Donaldson-Honeywell, who raised the issue of the improper prison litigation in a letter to former prime minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar months before Hinds’ speech.
Donaldson-Honeywell’s allegations, refered to as Prisongate, resulted in a police probe, which is still on going. Donaldson-Honeywell subsequently resigned and is now a judge of the High Court.
In addition to seeking compensation for the damage to his reputation, Ramlogan is also seeking an injunction against Hinds preventing him from making further statements of a similar nature.
As he testified before Justice Vasheist Kokaram in the Port-of-Spain High Court, Ramlogan denied the allegations as he claimed the decision to settle lawsuits against the State was not part of his purview when he held office as attorney general.
“This does not come to the attention of the Attorney General. Even with the (Jamal) Sambury case, I learned about it from the newspapers,” Ramlogan said.
He was refering to a case of prisoner Jamal Sambury, who claimed he was beaten by police officers, which raised a hornet’s nest as High Court Master Patricia Sobion-Awai found that statements detailing his claims in the lawsuit had been “copied and pasted” from other successful claims from other prisoners.
Ramlogan also denied allegations that he had taken issue with Donald-Honeywell’s direct communication with the then prime minister as he said she was allowed to address Persad-Bissessar directly as an independent Government officer.
He was then the line minister for the Solicitor General and Persad-Bissessar referred the complaints back to him to resolve.
Ramlogan was also forced to defend increases in the Office of the AG’s annual budget during his tenure.
“We had an avalanche of unpaid bills we inherited when we entered office. There were forensic probes into the activities of some State companies and agencies as well as the Clico commission of enquiry,” Ramlogan said.
He is being represented by Senior Counsel Avory Sinanan and Kelvin Ramkissoon.
Hinds is scheduled to testify in his defence when the trial resumes this morning.