Gail Alexan­der

Se­nior Po­lit­i­cal Re­porter

Lawyers rep­re­sent­ing for­mer Es­tate Man­age­ment and Busi­ness De­vel­op­ment Com­pa­ny Ltd (EM­BD) board mem­bers and oth­er of­fi­cials may be tak­ing le­gal ac­tion against the com­pa­ny, as they claim they are be­ing ha­rassed and asked to give state­ments against Dr Roodal Mooni­lal.

Mooni­lal al­so al­leged that there are “peo­ple in TTPS” who have con­tacts with Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty Min­is­ter Fitzger­ald Hinds and who have “in­struc­tions” from Hinds to re­open the shelved EM­BD crim­i­nal probe af­ter $1 bil­lion was spent on in­ves­ti­ga­tions.

He al­so warned po­lice that the Unit­ed Na­tion­al Con­gress knows the of­fi­cers’ iden­ti­ty and if they “did the PNM’s dirty work,” they’d end up like sus­pend­ed Po­lice Com­mis­sion­er Er­la Hare­wood-Christo­pher.

Mooni­lal made the claims dur­ing the UNC’s Princes Town Pave­ment Re­port.

Deem­ing the EM­BD is­sue the “biggest po­lit­i­cal witch­hunt,” Mooni­lal claimed it was like sea­sons one, two and three of a Net­flix se­ries: first in­volv­ing “car­tel be­hav­iour” al­le­ga­tions, end­ing in a for­eign UK group be­ing hired for in­ves­ti­ga­tion and paid $45 mil­lion. He said, “Sea­son two start­ed dur­ing the 2020 gen­er­al elec­tions when a judge said the case raised se­ri­ous ques­tions and sea­son three comes on the eve of the 2025 elec­tions.”

Mooni­lal said Gov­ern­ment al­ways said he had ques­tions to an­swer and he an­swered, “But they changed the ques­tion.”

He said he had filed his de­fence in De­cem­ber 2024, and has a King’s Coun­sel at­tor­ney.

He said EM­BD then said they want­ed to change the ques­tion with new al­le­ga­tions.

“Their case was blown wide open by our lawyers. Now they come with a next cock and bull sto­ry that when I was min­is­ter, I was a ‘shad­ow di­rec­tor’... that’s un­known to our law.

“But when they read our de­fence they re­alised they had no case, so now we have to an­swer that. I bet when we an­swer that they’ll come with a next al­le­ga­tion be­cause they not con­cerned with that case, they’re con­cerned with the elec­tion ... to use that as a cam­paign weapon,” he claimed.

Wit­ness state­ments

sought 10 years lat­er

Mooni­lal read out al­leged emails is­sued Thurs­day from at­tor­neys Van­dana Kissoon to Sav­it­ri Sookraj-Be­har­ry copied to oth­ers at Pol­lon­ais, Blanc, de la Bastide and Jacelon law firm—EM­BD’s rep­re­sen­ta­tive—on the sub­ject, “Wit­ness State­ment.”

Mooni­lal claimed they were “now ask­ing” for­mer EM­BD of­fi­cials if they would be amenable to give re­spons­es to ques­tions about at­ten­dance and role at board meet­ings in April and Ju­ly 2015, rec­ol­lec­tions of events/dis­cus­sions that oc­curred; cir­cum­stances re­gard­ing the award of con­tracts, and if of­fi­cials ever got in­struc­tions from Mooni­lal on any EM­BD con­trac­tors or oth­er mem­bers get­ting board di­rec­tions.

Mooni­lal said, “You ask peo­ple to­day what hap­pened in Ju­ly and April 2015? These peo­ple have no case against me! They file a case and don’t have a wit­ness state­ment! They don’t have ev­i­dence! They have noth­ing!

“So now they go by the junc­tion and las­so any­body they could find, ‘come, come tell we what hap­pened’. They file case against me and ask­ing peo­ple for ev­i­dence 10 years lat­er! Mad­ness!”

“The lawyers rep­re­sent­ing for­mer mem­bers of that board and oth­er of­fi­cials told me to­day, that in light of this, they’re look­ing at tak­ing ac­tion against EM­BD on the grounds of ha­rass­ment and wit­ness tam­per­ing!” Mooni­lal claimed.