Defence: Alleyne fired because he refused to play ball

Former chairman of the Unit Trust Corporation, Hubert Alleyne, was fired from his job because he dared to cross swords with Minister of Finance Patrick Manning, who is also Prime Minister. This was the contention of Alleyne’s attorney, Dr Claude Denbow SC, as he was asked by the court yesterday to interpret the UTC Act. Dr Denbow said that Alleyne  “got his throat cut” because he refused to play ball and bow to political pressure, but instead chose to maintain the independence of the UTC’s Board of directors. He said it was an abuse of power by the Minister and an attempt to control the UTC.

According to Denbow, Alleyne refused to adhere to the wishes of the Minister of Finance and appoint Renrick Nickie as the new executive director of the UTC. Additionally, Alleyne refused to support the Minister’s plan to merge the UTC with First Citizens Bank.  Denbow told Justice David Myers that when Alleyne showed such courage and independence, “the old political culture was resurrected — if you don’t like it get to hell out of here.” And that was exactly what happened to Alleyne. But they went about firing Alleyne contrary to law, he argued. Denbow, who leads his wife Donna, also an attorney, instructed by Kelvin Ramkissoon, argued that contrary to the UTC Act, Cabinet had taken a decision to fire Alleyne and made such a recommendation to the President. Denbow contended that a decision to fire must come from the Board, and the Governor of the Central Bank must then forward that recommendation to the President.

He said the Minister of Finance has nothing to do with the hiring or firing of an executive director. The only part the Minister plays was in determining the length of time a director stays in office. And the practice is that the executive director is given four years and the chairman, five years. This procedure has not been changed since the UTC came into existence. He said that it was the first time that a Minister of Finance saw it necessary to interfere with the smooth running of the UTC and arbitrarily fire a chairman. The court heard that Alleyne was enthusiastically recommended by the Governor of the Central Bank to be UTC’s  chairman, but just 13 months later, Alleyne’s character — his integrity, reputation and all that make up a man’s self respect — was being impugned, splashed all over the media as a person threatening to collapse the financial sector.

He said that Alleyne was also fired because he made certain statements to the media, which it was claimed, threatened the financial sector, but up to today, Alleyne’s dismissal letter has not identified his alleged damaging statement. The court heard about an exchange of letters between Alleyne, the Governor of the Central Bank and the Ministers of Finance with regards to elevating Nickie to executive director. In at least two letters it was stated that the Minister strongly advised that the Board appoint Nickie, in spite of Alleyne’s claims that Nickie did not enjoy the confidence or support of the Board.

Denbow explained that the Board of directors of the UTC comprised 12 members, three of which represent the Minister of Finance, the Central Bank and the National Insurance Board. However, in order to have a quorum, at least one of these directors must be present at the meeting. Denbow observed that these three key directors belonged to State bodies and suggested that in the factual matrix of our political culture, they could collectively hold the Board to ransom or paralyse it. This is exactly what happened, he said. Alleyne’s action was brought against the Attorney General, who is being defended by Jamaican constitutional attorney Dr Lloyd Barnett, while attorney David Quamina represents Manning as the Minister of Finance and Conrad Enill, Minister in the Ministry of Finance.

Instructing attorneys for both the AG and the Ministers are acting Chief State Solicitor Christopher Grant, Haran Ramkaransingh and Josefina Baptiste. Before the start of the matter yesterday, Quamina said his clients were concerned about the pretrial publicity and any possible  influence it could have on the court while the matter was still being heard in Chambers. However, it was agreed that the matter should be heard in open court. When hearing resumes today, Denbow will continue with his submissions.