U.S. disappointed in the outcome of the Ishwar Galbaransingh and Steve Ferguson extradition case - Our governments work together closely to extradite suspects to both countries
CCDSJ_TT
By Jada Loutoo Thursday, December 22 2011
TWO days after Attorney General Anand Ramlogan indicated he will not pursue an appeal in the extradition of former UNC financiers Ishwar Galbaransingh and Steve Ferguson, the United States government has gone on record to say it was “disappointed” by the outcome of the case.
The United States (US) Embassy in Trinidad yesterday issued a
statement on the latest development in the extradition case of Galbaransingh and
Ferguson, which effectively puts a halt to the two facing criminal prosecution
in a US Federal Court.
“We are disappointed in the outcome of the Ishwar
Galbaransingh and Steve Ferguson extradition case,” the first line of the
statement read.
On Monday, the same day the 24-day period for the State
to appeal the ruling of High Court Judge Justice Ronnie Boodoosingh expired,
Ramlogan said he was not going to file an appeal.
In its statement, the
US Embassy noted that extradition was a crime-fighting tool and was used by
countries all over the world including the US and Trinidad and Tobago.
“The Government of the United States and the Government of Trinidad and
Tobago have had a bilateral extradition treaty in place since 1996.
“Our
governments work together closely to extradite suspects to both countries,” the
US Embassy’s statement emphasised.
Galbaransingh and Ferguson were first
indicted in 2005 in Miami Federal Court on numerous fraud and money laundering
charges stemming from alleged bid-rigging between 1996 and 2005 on contracts for
the Piarco International Airport. They faced up to five years’ imprisonment on
the various conspiracy counts, and up to 30 years’ imprisonment on the bank
fraud count
“The United States has pursued their extradition since
2005,” the United States Embassy reminded yesterday. “Extradition is a powerful
tool for fighting transnational crime and is used by countries all over the
world including the United States and Trinidad and Tobago.
“Though we
are very disappointed in the outcome, we value our relationship with Trinidad
and Tobago and will continue to work with the Government on other extradition
cases,” the US Embassy’s statement said.
Speaking at a toy distribution
drive in her Siparia constituency yesterday, Prime Minister Kamla
Persad-Bissessar said she was unaware of the US Embassy’s statement and directed
all queries to the Attorney General (AG).
Ramlogan, in another statement
yesterday, said he was not surprised that the US was disappointed in the outcome
of the extradition case. However, he said, “Trinidad and Tobago is an
independent sovereign state with a written Constitution, laws and a legal system
of its own and the AG is duty bound to respect and have regard to the judgment
of the Supreme Court in Trinidad and Tobago,” he said.
Yesterday, he
said, legal challenges of the extradition process may be protracted for another
three to five years and given the alleged offences occurred over a decade ago,
the lapse of time in the matter could realistically amount to between 18 to 20
years.
“Ironically therefore to appeal would further prolong the already
unsatisfactory pre-trial delay in a matter that has had a colourful, complicated
and meandering history,” he said.
“The longest rope must have an end and
there is a real risk that the defendants could altogether escape the prospect of
a criminal trial if an appeal is pursued by the State,” he said.
“Of
paramount importance is the question of where are the defendants likely to be
brought to justice in the quickest and shortest possible time. An appeal would
have resulted in the defendant’s remaining on bail whilst they continue to
muscle their way through a thus far accommodating legal system. It was unlikely
that they could even face trial in the United States of America before
expiration of a further eight to ten years,” he said.
Ramlogan noted
that not appealing meant that the way was cleared for the local courts to
commence the trial of the two without further delay.
“It does not mean
that the defendants will walk free without facing trial; a possible prospect if
the State appealed,” he said.
He said he had every confidence in the
local Supreme Court to competently and fairly try the men and deliver justice.
“Like the United States of America, the state of Trinidad and Tobago has
also incurred great expense in this matter in which close to $100 million has
been expended in time and money,” he said.
Adding that Galbaransingh and
Ferguson have exercised all their pre-trial legal options, Ramlogan said the
“road is therefore now clear for the criminal justice system to get into high
gear and commence their trial.”
“The objective of both systems of
criminal justice is one and the same and it is time that the pre-trial legal
adventures stop and the defendants be tried according to law,” Ramlogan noted.
Boodoosingh, on November 7, quashed the AG’s decision to sign the
extradition warrants against the two.
Boodoosingh, in his ruling on the
judicial review application sought by the two, said the signing of the
extradition warrant was “unjust and oppressive,” and that they should face trial
in a local court.
In January 2007, at a sentencing hearing in Miami, a
US federal court judge publicly criticised the slow pace of the local
prosecution of those allegedly involved in the bid-rigging scam. Miami district
court judge Paul C Huck said he was not encouraged by the pace of the case in
the local courts.
“I haven’t been all that encouraged with the speed in
which they are moving down in Trinidad and Tobago.”
Ferguson alone was
wanted on an 82-count indictment, including charges of laundering US$3,255,345
($20,508,673) between the period November 24, 2000 and March 28, 2002.
Galbaransingh was wanted on a 13-count indictment, including charges of
laundering US$1million ($6.3 million) between the period June 19, 2001 and
December 10, 2001. They were charged in accordance with Sections 44, 45 and 46
of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2000.
A United States grand jury returned
the indictment against the two on November 29, 2005.
Charges against
Galbaransingh and Ferguson in the local courts were discontinued, in favour of
prosecution in the American courts.
Ramlogan said his decision not to
appeal now paves the way for the Director of Public Prosecutions to take the
necessary steps to law indictments against the two businessmen in respect of the
charges against them in relation to the Piarco expansion project, as they have
been committed to stand trial in the Assizes.
Six foreign nationals were
convicted and sentenced in the US for defrauding the TT Government.
According to the US case, the scam allegedly involved rigging the bid
process to secure construction contracts by arranging for a shadow bidder to
submit a fraudulent and over-inflated bid. It also allegedly included what was
called loan kiting — the borrowing of money from one bank to pay off a loan from
another bank and hiding the skimmed profits in offshore accounts.
Several US banks were defrauded and a civil lawsuit was filed by the TT
Government in the US, aimed at recovering more than US$100 million in
compensation damages.
In 2009, former AG John Jeremie said government
had recovered in excess of a quarter billion dollars ($250 million) in
compensation as a result of civil lawsuits filed in foreign courts and
restitution from those convicted in the US in relation to the airport scandal.