Speaker: Privy Council cleared me of corruption chargesSPEAKER Jagdeo Singh told Newsday he was cleared by the highest court in the land, when asked about once being charged for corruption but ultimately cleared.
Newsday spoke to him on May 23 at the celebration of the opening of Parliament in the Red House Rotunda after he was earlier elected Speaker of the House of Representatives.
He was given seven years hard labour in 2001 in the Port of Spain Assizes after conviction under two charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act (to run concurrently), and in 2002 the Appeal Court dismissed his appeal and affirmed his sentence.
However in 2005, the UK-based Privy Council quashed the convictions, ruling, "Having regard to the term already served by the appellant, a retrial was inappropriate."
Newsday asked him if public confidence in him as Speaker could be undermined by the case, such as if people felt he had got off on a technicality.
He replied, "I don't know about that."
"I believe in the rule of law and the Privy Council has spoken. That is all I could say at this point."
Newsday asked if people would have reservations about him?
He replied, "I can't control what people feel. But I could control what I do. Thank you very much."
Asked if anybody has expressed any concern, he replied, "No. Thank you very much." He turned away to continue to socialise with family members.
Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar, when later asked if Singh's past could taint the government despite his conviction being overturned, responded with another question.
"What was the last word you said there? Exactly, overturned."
She added, "Our justice system allows us to have justice. You are innocent until proven guilty and he remains innocent because he was never proven guilty. All the charges have been thrown out."
She expressed unwavering confidence in him and suggested his qualities far outweighed his previous legal troubles.
"He is a very strong a person and very learned in law and on that basis I think he will make an excellent Speaker.
"He's committed to helping people and has done it in his practice so that’s what we are about."
Given that TT had woken up earlier to news of new parliamentary appointments, Newsday asked Opposition Leader Pennelope Beckles if TT ought to adopt the US system of congressional committees publicly vetting nominees for public office. She replied, "It is a matter that ultimately I think we will have to look at."
Beckles said she did not see any nominations before the sitting.
"We saw it in the newspapers. We came, like you, to the Parliament and that would have been the first time that we knew about it.
"I have made my position very clear about willing to collaborate, willing to listen to the government, not to take a confrontational approach.
"Yes, I would have preferred that we knew about it before."
Attorneys back Singh's appointmentMeanwhile several top attorneys backed fraternity member Singh's elevation to Speaker.
Singh, an attorney with decades of experience under his belt, was elected unopposed at the first parliamentary sitting after being nominated by the leader of government business in the house, Couva South MP Barry Padarath.
Head of the Criminal Bar Association Israel Khan believes the experienced attorney would bring value to parliamentary proceedings.
"He will be fair to both opposition and government members in their debate in parliament. It's good to see young people coming forward to serve. So I think it's a very good choice. The nation should be proud of that selection."
Assembly of Southern Lawyers president Saira Lakhan said Singh was a senior attorney who was well-regarded in the legal community for his advocacy and legal acumen.
"Over the past decade, Mr Singh has mentored dozens of attorneys-at-law, many of whom now serve with distinction at the Bar. He has made substantial contributions to the development of the law in both the civil and criminal jurisdictions, having appeared in several landmark matters and assisted in shaping the jurisprudence of our courts."
Lakhan said she expected that Singh would be valuable in his new role.
"His appointment as Speaker is ultimately a matter for the House of Representatives and the government it comprises. While the assembly does not endorse political appointments, we trust that those chosen to serve in high constitutional office are expected to bring honour, impartiality, and a strong sense of duty to the role."
According to his LinkedIn profile, Singh was most recently the head of chambers and lead counsel at Fortis Chambers. He served on the Law Reform Commission for six consecutive years between 2011 and 2017. He also appeared as counsel in the Clico Commission of Enquiry, the Commission of Enquiry concerning the 1990 attempted coup and the Commission of Enquiry concerning the construction of the Las Alturas Towers.
Singh ended up in hot water over 20 years ago when he was arrested and convicted on corruption charges before it was later quashed by the Privy Council. Both legal minds believe this bump in an otherwise long and rich career should not detract from his ability to function as Speaker.
"I think he has the necessary integrity and ability and experience to be a good Speaker of the House."
In simple terms, Lakhan explained that the Privy Council's ruling meant that Singh was innocent of the charges.
"The highest appellate court in our jurisdiction, after hearing the matter, reached its decision to overturn the convictions in notably short order. The principle of the presumption of innocence and the finality of appellate judgments are cornerstones of our legal system.
"Once an individual is cleared by the apex court, the legal effect is as if they had never been convicted."
Princes Town MP Dr Aiyna Ali was elected unopposed as deputy Speaker.
Former speaker during 2010 to 2015 Wade Mark was also elected unopposed to be president of the Senate. According to Parliament's website, Mark first entered the Parliament as an opposition senator in 1990. He served as speaker between 2010 and 2015. He also served as an opposition senator from 2015 to 2025.
Kenya Charles was elected unopposed as Senate vice president.
Background to legal trouble:In 2001, Singh was convicted by a jury on two counts of corruption. He was sentenced to concurrent terms of seven years on each count.
Singh lost his appeal against the conviction before Chief Justice Satnarine Sharma and Justices of Appeal Roger Hamel-Smith and Judith Jones on November 15, 2002.
By special leave granted on October 2, 2003, the Privy Council allowed Singh to challenge the conduct of his trial. He argued that the facts alleged against him did not constitute an offence and that his conviction was tainted by an inadequate good character direction. He contended that his trial was unfair and that the trial judge’s failure to properly instruct the jury could have affected their assessment of his credibility.
Although he failed on the first ground, he was successful on the second. The Privy Council noted that there was no evidence Singh had offered a bribe, which weakened the prosecution's case. The court also found that both the giver and receiver could be considered to have acted “corruptly,” noting that the need for a full good character direction should have been addressed and that the judge’s inadequate direction could have resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
The Privy Council concluded that the jury might not have convicted Singh if it had been properly directed on the issue of his credibility. As a result, Singh’s appeal was allowed, and his convictions were quashed. No retrial was ordered due to the time he had already spent in prison.
According to the evidence in the case, in 1999, Singh, then a 33-year-old lawyer, was retained by a woman to represent her partner in drug-related proceedings.
In October 1999, after the woman’s partner was again arrested, Singh allegedly agreed to represent him for an additional $50,000. He acknowledged receiving $10,000 towards this new matter but denied receiving a further alleged payment.
It was alleged that Singh approached the magistrate in the case, then Magistrate Deborah Thomas-Felix, regarding the man’s bail, which she refused due to other pending charges. On November 11, 1999, the man’s partner claimed that Singh solicited a $40,000 bribe, supposedly for the magistrate and prosecutor, to secure bail. Singh denied this, insisting he only sought payment of his outstanding fees.
Later, a police sting operation was arranged involving a woman police constable posing as a friend of Singh’s client.
During a meeting, it was alleged that Singh implied that once he received the money, he would inform the magistrate and that everything would be fine. He reportedly said that bail would follow, or the money would be returned.
It was further alleged that Singh collected the money from the women at a KFC outlet in Curepe. Singh was subsequently arrested.
https://newsday.co.tt/2025/05/24/speake ... charges-2/
