DPP tells Gov't to back off

PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad (CMC):

In an apparent bid to reinforce the state prosecution service's independence of the Kamla Persad-Bissessar administration, Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Roger Gaspard on Sunday appeared to distance his office from the government's decision to appoint extra lawyers to help prosecute people arrested under the state of emergency, the Guardian newspaper reported.

"No other office holder would be allowed to choose any attorney for me for the prosecution of any matter; that choice remains exclusively mine," Gaspard said in a Guardian interview.

The comments followed Attorney General Anand Ramlogan's decision to retain two former judges and four senior counsels, including the head of the Law Association, Dana Seetahal, to assist with the prosecution of citizens arrested under the state of emergency.

Respected role

Ramlogan said then the DPP's constitutional role "in all of this is respected and carefully demarcated".

The office of the Director of Public Prosecutions is a constitutionally independent post, appointed by, and accountable only to, the president.

The Attorney General is a ministerial post, although by convention he is expected to offer impartial legal advice to the government.

The paper quoted Gaspard as saying he would "continue to jealously guard his office at all cost" and act independently of the state.

But the DPP would not be drawn on whether his office was in conflict with the government's chief law officer.

Gaspard said: "I know of no war between the AG and myself. There are no winners in war. I humbly prefer simply to continue to do my work soberly so as to protect and advance the public's interest."

In the wake of last week's release of 21 persons arrested during the state of emergence under the controversial Anti-Gang Act, Gaspard stressed there was no case for the men to answer as no evidence was forthcoming.

Inadmissible evidence

He added that closed-circuit television (CCTV) pictures gathered as evidence in the case was inadmissible as the security footage was obtained before the law had come into force.

"The reason why the State could not go forward was because of the sheer lack of evidence. I do not know if they have knowledge that I do not have," Gaspard told the Guardian.

But police sources told the paper that the file on the case contained statements from the police complainant, an "anti-gang expert", and a police profiling unit.

Pointing out that the Anti-Gang Act 2011 came into effect on August 15, Gaspard said people could not be prosecuted for offences prior to the act being implemented. The CCTV footage was shot in January and March, five months before the act was passed.

Last week, the secretary of the Police Service Social and Welfare Association, Sergeant Michael Seales, claimed that police officers complained to the association that they had been instructed to detain first "and the evidence would come later".