OPPOSITION Leader Allen Chastanet is not backing down in seeking judgment from the courts, in an attempt to quell a decision that was made to dismiss all charges against Deputy Prime Minister Dr. Ernest Hilaire regarding a vehicle.
Last year, it was agreed that all accusations against Hilaire concerning the importation of a vehicle would be dropped.
On December 2, 2021, the Acting Comptroller of Customs Sherman Emmanuel informed a court-appointed mediator that there was no evidence to pursue charges against the Castries South MP, as he was satisfied with the documents on file. The charges were then withdrawn, a decision which was endorsed by the court.
Chastanet is now seeking leave to argue before a court that the decision by the Comptroller of Customs was wrong and must be overturned.
Speaking to the media after the court judgment, Hilaire opined that the objections were tinged with political diatribes in an attempt to malign his reputation. Hilaire and Chastanet have been at loggerheads with each other, embroiled in legal battles since the matter appeared before the courts, more than two years ago.
Said Hilaire: “I have always maintained that the charges laid against me were politically motivated. The decision at mediation (was) endorsed by the court. I do not understand what the Leader of the Opposition is trying to do because he is not a party to the decision, the Comptroller of Customs can make decisions on behalf of Customs.
“His actions just prove his obsession with me as there is no other reason why he is applying to the court to attempt to challenge what the Comptroller did.”
In unfolding developments, Chastanet contends that the charges were withdrawn without the authorization of the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) and that the Comptroller of Customs failed to apply applicable policies when making his decision.
He also argued that Hilaire and other political considerations influenced the Comptroller of Customs when making his decision.
The case involves importing a luxury vehicle from the United Kingdom, where Hilaire served as the island’s High Commissioner. However, according to court documents, Hilaire has maintained his innocence and that the actions of the Customs Department were politically motivated, as evidenced by the removal of two Comptrollers from office for failing to act on instructions to charge him criminally.
In a recent ruling, Justice Shawn Innocent explained that the “Court is concerned only to examine whether the respondent had an arguable ground for judicial review which has a realistic prospect of success.”
He added: “If the Court is confident at the leave stage that the legal position was entirely clear and to the effect that the claim could succeed, it would usually be appropriate for the Court to dispose of the matter at that stage,”
Responding to the latest judgment, Chastanet said that the judge had decided “that we did not provide sufficient evidence as to the DPP’s official role in the case, and as such, he agreed that the Comptroller of Customs was allowed to use his discretion to withdraw or terminate the case.”
The opposition leader further queries as to why “the judge also awarded costs to Hilaire”. He contends that the decision “in no way exonerates Ernest Hilaire of the allegations against him.”
Chastanet said together with his legal advisors, they are “currently reviewing the Court’s decision to appeal”.
“It is my strong belief that this is a matter of public interest, and the Comptroller of Customs owes the public of Saint Lucia an explanation of his unilateral decision to withdraw the case. The person involved is a senior politician with a lot of influence within this administration, and we must all be satisfied that he was not treated differently from any ordinary citizen,” Chastanet added.
He said that the main opposition, the United Workers Party (UWP), “will continue to pursue this matter until all legal means have been exhausted.
“We believe all public officers must be held accountable to their pledge to uphold the laws of the country and protect the best interest of the public without favour.”