Wayne Sturge, one of the attorneys behind this week’s failed no confidence motion in Law Association president Reginald Armour, SC, and vice president Gerry Brooks, has threatened to sue one of the junior attorneys who caused the motion to collapse after support for it was withdrawn at the last minute. 

In a pre-action protocol letter sent to attorney Seana Baboolal yesterday, Sturge claimed that she defamed him when she wrote to the association prior to Monday’s special meeting to say that she had been misled into signing the petition calling for Armour and Brooks’ removal. 

The attorneys who drafted it claimed that both Armour and Brooks showed political biased based on their alleged failure to speak on several recent legislative measures taken by Government. 

In the letter sent on July 13, Baboolal said she signed the document “solely for the purpose of my status being as a practicing attorney” and not for the no confidence motion. 

But Sturge said Baboolal’s letter damaged his reputation, as her words implied that he had duped her into signing the document. He noted that as an attorney Baboolal ought to have known “of the history, public nature and the controversy surrounding the requisition, in addition to knowing of the claimant’s role and high profile generally.” The letter states that Sturge would forego pursuing the case if Baboolal apologises and pays him compensation. Baboolal has 21 days to reply. 

The association meanwhile yesterday issued a release from senior member Elton Prescott, SC, who chaired the special committee established to preside over the no confidence motion. In the release, Prescott said during a meeting in May this year, member Robin Montano raised a number of questions of the association’s handling of the Strategic Services Agency (Amendment) Bill. 

He said on June 30, the Council received a petition signed by 29 practitioner members and one non-practitioner member and they scheduled a Special General Meeting on July 29 to address the petition and to debate the no confidence motion. 

He said that after the association set a date for the meeting, it received letters from 13 of the 30 attorneys who signed the petition, who claimed they no longer supported it. 

Prescott said when the remaining signatories were confronted with the development at the meeting, they refused to say whether they would continue to support it. He noted that one senior member pointed out that without the support of the 13 signatories, the petition could not go foward as the association’s constitution requires 25 signatures to move a motion. A substantial majority of the members present indicated, by show of hands, that the meeting had not been validly convened and should not proceed,” he added.


© Luis Alfonso Oberto Anselmi


© Luis Alfonso Oberto Anselmi

Tags: Isla

Con información de: The trinidad Guardian


View all posts