Letters & Opinion, Politics

Once ALiar, Always ALiar!

IT cannot be easy being Allen Chastanet in today’s Saint Lucia. Consider that in just eight years he has already been branded by the OECS Court of Appeal as a man whose word cannot be trusted; a man who in concert with others attempted to deprive the State of revenue; and a man who attempted to cover up the criminal activity of defrauding the State. As if that weren’t enough of a negative image to be carrying around, Chastanet orchestrated the expulsion from the United Workers Party, the Castries Central MP, Richard Frederick, the man widely acknowledged as one of the architects of the Party’s rise to government in 2006.

For good measure, Chastanet also oversaw the removal of former Prime Minister Stephenson King from his position as leader of the Parliamentary Opposition. In the process, Chastanet has fractured the UWP in a way no one ever has. Imagine, just recently, his Deputy Leader, Lenard Spider Montoute, convened a political meeting in the town of Gros Islet with no invitation to Chastanet and his loyal poodle, Guy Joseph.

Despite his triumph at the internal party elections, not a single day goes by without a member of the UWP calling for Chastanet’s resignation; the most recent of these being woman’s activist, Catherine Sealy, who accused the party leader of misogynistic behaviour. According to the Women In Action (WIA) executive member, Chastanet’s attitude to the women in the party is nothing short of disrespectful.

So disruptive has been Chastanet’s tenure at the helm, that many have now replaced the “United” in the party’s name with “divided”. So fractured is the party that the discussions around local watering holes now centre on the formation of a new party by extremely disgruntled senior members.

With all that negativity dogging his every move it is easy to understand why Chastanet would daily wish for some good luck to come his way. It mattered not how megre the amount, Chastanet was simply just hoping for a change of fortune. Still, does that give Chastanet the right to attempt to mislead Saint Lucians into thinking his luck has changed for the better? Does lust for power overcome the need to speak truthfully to the people whom he so desperately wants to lead?

True to form, Chastanet was last week busily proclaiming victory in the government’s case against him for the misuse of the funds belonging to the Soufriere Town Council, as it was then called. But did the learned judge really exonerate Allen Chastanet?

The judge dealt first with the legal standing of the Attorney General in whose name the case was filed. Notwithstanding the several authorities cited by attorneys representing the State, the learned judge concluded, somewhat astonishingly, that the Attorney General was not the person to have proceeded with the matter. Interestingly, however, the language of the judge was not the stinging rebuttal expected by Chastanet but was instead most cautiously couched. Citing the case Marin v Attorney General where the Caribbean Court of Justice ruled in favour of the Attorney General’s standing, as “highly persuasive” the learned judge nonetheless wrote; “But this court (meaning his court) is not bound by this decision.” He then stated “I conclude that in spite of Marin there is no binding authority on this court which states the Attorney General has the authority to sue the Applicant for the tort of misfeasance in public office.” Certainly not a ringing endorsement of victory for Allen Chastanet.

Next the judge dealt with the matter of whether the money used at the Soufriere event could be considered as “public funds”. According to the learned judge, it was his considered view that the State’s pleadings “did not make out a case that the funds used . . . were public funds”. It was the judge’s view that because the Council’s account contained funds other than those given by Central Government, a case had not been made that the money used was actually funds placed there by the Central government as opposed to funds raised by the council itself. He was also of the view that once the monies had reached the Council they were no longer “public” funds.

Notwithstanding, the judge at paragraph 61 of his judgment sent a stinging rebuke to Chastanet when he stated: “I also conclude that based on the pleadings the monies were spent as though they were part of what is colloquially referred to as a ‘slush fund’. Consequently the ‘slush fund’ may have been spent as intended. No doubt this is a vulgar and socially destructive way of going about funding community projects and an election campaign . .”

How Allen Chastanet can consider this stinging rebuke as a victory is anyone’s guess.

But there is more. Clearly wishing to have his party reconsider its negative image of him, Chastanet would take to his favourite Talk Show hosts, the UWP flavoured Timothy Poleon and Dave Samuels. On the latter’s show Chastanet would make a most startling and bizarre comment. But first let us return to the court case itself generally and to Allen Chastanet’s affidavit in particular. At paragraph 8 of the affidavit dated 6 January 2014, Chastanet averred to the following: “The Lighting Ceremony was followed by a political event promoted by the United Workers Party (UWP) . . . That event was immediately followed by a free concert featuring the ‘Third World’ band. The ‘Third World’ band performed at the cost of US30,000.00 and ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONCERT WERE FUNDED BY MY OWN PERSONAL FUNDS AND CONTRIBUTIONS THAT I HAD RECEIVED FROM SUPOPRTERS. NONE OF THE EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE POLITICAL RALLY OR THE FREE CONCERT WERE MET BY THE SOUFRIERE TOWN COUNCIL . . .”

The foregoing is what Allen Chastanet presented to the court as being the truth. But what was it?

Basking in what he attempted to show was a victory for him Chastanet as stated earlier took to his twin favourite shows. No doubt buoyed by the protection offered to him by his ever grateful host, Dave Samuels, Chastanet proceeded to make statements which directly contradicted his affidavit. On the show, Allen Chastanet admitted “the fact I, s it is public funds but they are not Crown Funds.”

He added; “So it means that if the Town Council was the entity that was harmed that they feel they lost out on this money, they should have been the ones pursuing.”

Didn’t Allen Chastanet, in his affidavit to the Court, state that ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONCERT WERE FUNDED BY MY OWN PERSONAL FUNDS AND CONTRIBUTIONS THAT I HAD RECEIVED FROM SUPOPRTERS. NONE OF THE EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE POLITICAL RALLY OR THE FREE CONCERT WERE MET BY THE SOUFRIERE TOWN COUNCIL? But there he was on television stating for all to hear that since the Soufriere Town Council was the one which paid then it was the Council and not the Attorney General who should have filed the suit.

Did Allen Chastanet, as he did in the Tuxedo Villas case, also lie to Justice Belle? Did Chastanet mislead the court? Is that who we want as our Prime Minister? Is Chastanet the face we want to promote Saint Lucia?

Pertinent as these questions may be, let us return to the case itself. One thing is certain: the conclusions and comments of Justice Belle makes this case a truly interesting case to appeal!


  1. “Did Allen Chastanet, as he did in the Tuxedo Villas case, also lie to Justice Belle? Did Chastanet mislead the court? Is that who we want as our Prime Minister? Is Chastanet the face we want to promote Saint Lucia?”
    Kenny has lost so much credibility since returning to office in 2011, that he makes Chastanet look like an Altar boy.

  2. /

    I could not imagine Allen Chastanet’s Lies and Deceptions getting any worse than the public and shameful actions exhibited by this deviant. Chastanet is being supported and buoyed by some of the most dysfunctional members of humanity – Incorrigible self-hating Negroes who are completely vacated of self-esteem.

    However, it was the statements by Allen’s father that struck me between the eyes. We have heard the saying, “Like Father like Son”, but it is how casually Michael Chastanet advocates the murder of St. Lucian Black men that is truly frightening.

    Michael Chastanet claims that the Killer Cops responsible for murdering several young St. Lucians were given justification for their actions by Israeli and U.S.A. agents. We know Israel is a Rogue State responsible for stealing land from the indigenous Peoples of Palestine while murdering their infants with the most sophisticated weapons and aided by the U.S.A.

    Michael Chastanet states that the foreign agents boasted that if we have knowledge of people giving us trouble we murder them/TAKE THEM OUT. I wonder who will “TAKE OUT” Allen and Michael Chastanet and their children ? Yet none of the leaders, Religious, Legal, and Political CONDEMNED this evil pirate who thinks murdering Lucian children is “kosher”.

    Please listen to this disgusting Devil Michael Chastanet advocate the murder of St. Lucians, yet this criminal has not been arrested for sedition and inciting murder.





  3. In the video Allen Chastanet can be heard saying, it is a common practice in the States to murder people without due process – this is what Pinochet did in South America. But individuals like Peter Josie, Ricky John Wayne, and Jeff Fedee keep deceiving you by saying how great it would be to have lowlifes like the Chastanets be the First Family of St. Lucia.

    Surah Al-Balad
    In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
    I do call to witness this City― (1)
    And thou art a freeman of this City― (2)
    And (the mystic ties of) Parent and Child― (3)
    Verily We have created Man into toil and struggle. (4)
    Thinketh he, that none hath power over him? (5)
    He may say (boastfully): “Wealth have I squandered in abundance!” (6)
    Thinketh he that none beholdeth him? (7)
    Have We not made for him a pair of eyes?― (8)
    And a tongue, and a pair of lips?― (9)
    And shown him the two highways? (10)
    But he hath made no haste on the path that is steep. (11)
    And what will explain to thee, the path that is steep? (12)
    (It is:) freeing the bondman; (13)
    Or the giving of food in a day of privation (14)
    To the orphan with claims of relationship, (15)
    Or to the indigent (down) in the dust. (16)
    Then will he be of those who believe, and enjoin patience, (constancy, and self-restraint), and enjoin deeds of kindness and compassion. (17)
    Such are the Companions of the Right Hand. (18)
    But those who reject Our Signs, they are the (unhappy) companions of the Left Hand. (19)
    On them will be Fire Vaulted over (all round). (20)

  4. Surah Al-Lail/The Night
    In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

    By the night enshrouding (1)
    And the day resplendent (2)
    And Him Who hath created male and female, (3)
    Lo! your effort is dispersed (toward divers ends). (4)
    As for him who giveth and is dutiful (toward Allah) (5)
    And believeth in goodness; (6)
    Surely We will ease his way unto the state of ease. (7)
    But as for him who hoardeth and deemeth himself independent, (8)
    And disbelieveth in goodness; (9)
    Surely We will ease his way unto adversity. (10)
    His riches will not save him when he perisheth. (11)
    Lo! Ours it is (to give) the guidance (12)
    And lo! unto Us belong the latter portion and the former. (13)
    Therefor have I warned you of the flaming Fire (14)
    Which only the most wretched must endure, (15)
    He who denieth and turneth away. (16)
    Far removed from it will be the righteous (17)
    Who giveth his wealth that he may grow (in goodness). (18)
    And none hath with him any favour for reward, (19)
    Except as seeking (to fulfil) the purpose of his Lord Most High. (20)
    He verily will be content. (21)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Send this to a friend