Akash Sama­roo

Lead Ed­i­tor-Pol­i­tics

akash.sama­roo@cnc3.co.tt

For­mer prime min­is­ter Dr Kei­th Row­ley says he has re­ceived threats from “cer­tain of­fi­cials of state” but in­sists he is not in­tim­i­dat­ed, warn­ing that he be­lieves the coun­try is en­ter­ing a dan­ger­ous pe­ri­od where state pow­er is be­ing used against per­ceived po­lit­i­cal op­po­nents.

Speak­ing ex­clu­sive­ly with Guardian Me­dia at his Good­wood Park, Diego Mar­tin home yes­ter­day, Row­ley claimed threats have been di­rect­ed not on­ly at him but the Peo­ple’s Na­tion­al Move­ment’s (PNM) Bal­isi­er House head­quar­ters.

“They could tar­get me if they wish be­cause I’ve been get­ting threats from cer­tain of­fi­cials of state that I am next, and Bal­isi­er House is next,” Row­ley said.

“They could do that if they wish, but I on­ly have one coun­try and that coun­try is Trinidad and To­ba­go. I fought for it and I will con­tin­ue to fight for it.”

Asked who made the threats against him, Row­ley de­clined to pro­vide names.

Asked whether he was con­cerned, the for­mer prime min­is­ter said, “Wor­ried? Me? I look wor­ried to you? Do I look wor­ried to you? No. I have one coun­try. I fought many bat­tles in this coun­try and for this coun­try and I will con­tin­ue so to do.”

Row­ley ac­cused the Kam­la Per­sad-Bisses­sar Gov­ern­ment of tar­get­ing peo­ple based on per­ceived po­lit­i­cal af­fil­i­a­tion, say­ing cit­i­zens were be­com­ing fear­ful.

“The Gov­ern­ment has de­clared war on the peo­ple of Trinidad and To­ba­go, large­ly on the ba­sis of who they per­ceive them to be sup­port­ers of po­lit­i­cal­ly. And if this coun­try doesn’t be­lieve me, those who are feel­ing the pres­sure now, my ad­vice to you is ban your bel­ly, there’s more to come,” he said.

He said the ad­min­is­tra­tion was op­er­at­ing on the premise that “if you pros­pered un­der the PNM, you must be de­stroyed.”

Row­ley al­so ad­dressed the on­go­ing pub­lic de­bate sur­round­ing busi­ness­man Do­minic Hadeed, who re­mains be­fore the courts fol­low­ing his de­ten­tion un­der the Emer­gency Pow­ers Reg­u­la­tions.

Row­ley avoid­ed di­rect com­ment on the mat­ter, but crit­i­cised the wider po­lit­i­cal nar­ra­tive sur­round­ing the case and raised con­cerns about the weapon­i­sa­tion of Pre­ven­tive De­ten­tion Or­ders (PDOs).

Hadeed’s at­tor­neys have ar­gued in court that state­ments made by At­tor­ney Gen­er­al John Je­re­mie dur­ing the de­bate on the ex­ten­sion of the State of Emer­gency formed part of the con­text sur­round­ing his de­ten­tion.

Dur­ing that de­bate, Je­re­mie re­peat­ed­ly re­ferred to mem­bers of the busi­ness com­mu­ni­ty as “the one per cent,” ac­cus­ing some of fi­nanc­ing the PNM and ben­e­fit­ing from State land.

Asked about the is­sue, Row­ley said he was “look­ing on in amaze­ment.”

“The PNM is held to a dif­fer­ent and high­er stan­dard in this coun­try. No PNM prime min­is­ter would have coun­te­nanced a PNM min­is­ter go­ing in the Par­lia­ment and do­ing that,” he said.

He al­so re­ject­ed sug­ges­tions that Hadeed was a PNM fi­nancier.

“I don’t know what the Hadeeds do with their mon­ey. I’ll tell you one thing, they cer­tain­ly didn’t give it to the PNM. Not to my knowl­edge,” Row­ley said.

He ac­knowl­edged the PNM ac­cepts do­na­tions dur­ing elec­tion cam­paigns from the pub­lic, but re­ject­ed claims of im­prop­er fi­nanc­ing.

Row­ley said his greater con­cern was the use of the SoE and PDOs.

“The av­er­age per­son in the coun­try is now say­ing that the states of emer­gency, as op­er­at­ed, are in fact crime-fight­ing tools. Now, if that is so, it be­comes a dan­ger­ous tool in the hands of a min­is­ter and a po­lice force,” he said.

Row­ley ques­tioned why peo­ple sus­pect­ed of gang ac­tiv­i­ty were not be­ing charged un­der ex­ist­ing leg­is­la­tion.

“They have an aver­sion to ev­i­dence. If the po­lice so know all these peo­ple in­volved in gang, why are they not be­ing charged and pros­e­cut­ed?” he asked.

He ac­cused the Gov­ern­ment of us­ing emer­gency pow­ers as a per­ma­nent polic­ing mech­a­nism.

Diplo­mat­ic pass­port is­sue per­son­al

Row­ley al­so re­spond­ed to the Gov­ern­ment’s re­view of diplo­mat­ic pass­ports and the pos­si­bil­i­ty that his pass­port could be re­clas­si­fied from diplo­mat­ic to of­fi­cial.

He ac­cused the ad­min­is­tra­tion of act­ing with “vin­dic­tive­ness and mal­ice,” claim­ing of­fi­cials ini­tial­ly sought to can­cel diplo­mat­ic pass­ports be­long­ing to his chil­dren. How­ev­er, he said his chil­dren nev­er pos­sessed diplo­mat­ic pass­ports.

“They (Gov­ern­ment of­fi­cials) were quite con­fused when they were so in­formed that there are no pass­ports to be can­celled,” he said.

Row­ley said he nev­er re­quest­ed a diplo­mat­ic pass­port af­ter leav­ing of­fice, adding it was pro­vid­ed based on ex­ist­ing con­ven­tion but not­ed he was not fight­ing to re­tain the doc­u­ment.

Asked whether he be­lieved the mat­ter was per­son­al, Row­ley replied, “Of course it’s per­son­al. Why wouldn’t I take it as per­son­al?”

Bal­isi­er House fund­ing al­le­ga­tions

Row­ley al­so de­fend­ed the fi­nanc­ing of the re­con­struct­ed Bal­isi­er House amid claims that ques­tions may be raised over how the project was fund­ed.

He said the par­ty had faced al­le­ga­tions from the start of con­struc­tion and re­ject­ed sug­ges­tions that il­le­gal funds were in­volved.

He crit­i­cised Prime Min­is­ter Kam­la Per­sad-Bisses­sar over claims that the head­quar­ters was built us­ing pro­ceeds from crim­i­nal ac­tiv­i­ty.

“The prime min­is­ter just saw it fit to make that state­ment. To be re­peat­ed by all and sundry at home and abroad,” Row­ley said.

“If they know that Bal­isi­er House was built by crime and the pro­ceeds of drug deal­ers and so on, they are free to pro­ceed,” he said.

Row­ley said the PNM would co­op­er­ate with any law­ful in­ves­ti­ga­tion in­to the fi­nanc­ing of its head­quar­ters.

He main­tained the par­ty head­quar­ters was fund­ed through mem­bers and sup­port­ers.