00:00Why is the conduct of Finance Minister Kom Imbert himself also not being investigated
00:07over a $2.5 billion understatement in this country's 2023 public financial records?
00:15The question was posed by Lady Simla, one member of a five-judge panel at the Privy
00:20Council in London, England, as the British law lords unanimously dismissed an appeal
00:26brought by Imbert and the Cabinet against Auditor General Jaywanti Ramdas related to
00:32the understatement.
00:34During the hearing, Lady Simla questioned Senior Counsel Douglas Mendes, who represented
00:39the Finance Minister, on why Ramdas but not Imbert was being investigated, suggesting
00:45that the investigation was one-sided.
00:48The ruling marked a defeat for the government and Finance Minister Kom Imbert when the panel
00:53of five law lords dismissed Imbert's appeal of the Court of Appeals' decision to grant
00:59Auditor General Ramdas' leave to file a judicial review claim against Imbert's decision
01:05to set up an investigation into her office.
01:08The substantive matter involves an understatement of between $2.6 billion and $3.379 billion
01:16in the Auditor General's report on the country's 2023 public financial records.
01:22The panel, comprising Lords Hodge, Sayles, Stephens, Lady Rose and Lady Simla, did not
01:29ask to hear the submissions from Ramdas' lead attorney, Anand Ramlogan, Senior Counsel,
01:35before making their decision.
01:37Following submissions from Senior Counsel Douglas Mendes on behalf of the Minister,
01:42the law lords briefly stood down the hearing.
01:45They returned a few minutes later when Lord Hodge announced the Board's decision that
01:49the local appeal court was correct in granting leave to Ramdas to file her claim.
01:55Given the importance of the matter in this country, Lord Hodge said the Board felt it
01:59necessary to deliver its ruling immediately and would provide written reasons at a later
02:05date.
02:06Now, there's nothing standing in the way of Ramdas from filing her claim.
02:11The investigative team, which is headed by retired High Court Justice David Harris, was
02:16appointed by the Cabinet based on Imbert's advice.
02:20The local judges have ruled that the High Court Justice Westman James had erred in law
02:26when he refused to grant Ramdas permission to file the claim.
02:30Ramdas' attorney argued that Imbert's recommendation to Cabinet to initiate the probe, select the
02:36investigative team, set its terms of reference and have it report directly to him was biased.
02:42She also complained through her attorneys that the Harris team was mandated to make
02:47the findings on her conduct and that Imbert was responsible for their remuneration.
02:53The Minister does not usually respond to queries posed by media, opting instead to post to
02:57social media.
02:58A search of social media showed no comment or response attached to his social media handles
03:06following the judgement.
Comments