‘They tried to blackmail me’

GRENADIAN Prime Minister Dr Keith Mitchell said an attempt was made to blackmail him after his Government terminated the services of German national Eric Resteiner, who was appointed Trade Counsellor for the Grenadian Government in 1999. Dr Mitchell said it was only after he refused to withdraw the termination letter, that he was told that he was on a tape, allegedly accepting a US $500,000 bribe from Resteiner.

Dr Mitchell, who is also the chairman of Caricom, spoke to Sunday Newsday on Friday at the VIP lounge at the Point Salines International Airport on his return from a two-day trip to Cariacou Island. A Commission of Inquiry has been appointed to investigate the allegations made against Dr Mitchell. The lone Commissioner — Dr Richard Cheltenham QC — launched the inquiry on Friday at York House in St George’s where he outlined how the Commission will proceed. Although no date has been set for reconvening the inquiry, Sunday Newsday learnt that it will resume in the first week of October.

The following is the interview:

Q: When was the first time that you became aware that there was an allegation (s) against you?

A: Maybe I can say, it could be about 2001 when we were moving to remove Mr Resteiner as a representative of the country after  receiving information that he was involved, at that time, of certain things. We did not know of it before that. We indicated to him through the Permanent Secretary that unless he cleared himself of these allegations, we will have to terminate. So one day, while at home, an individual called me.

I think it was the same guy making the allegation...his name is Bass, at least that is the recollection, and said that people were lying on the man (Resteiner) and that we should not cancel the appointment, and that the guy was clean. I said we were not accusing him of anything, we just wanted to make it clear that if he cannot give us reasons to show that the allegations were false, we will have to terminate him. Then he said we cannot terminate, because we have you on tape. I said my friend, if is blackmail you trying, it can’t work. That was the first time I understood there was any allegation which was made. At that time, they did not mention any amount of money was involved.

The next time I heard about this was sometime this year. Just before the Offshore Alert article, this guy called me and said some guy signed some statement saying that Mr Resteiner had given me US $500,000 for giving him a benefit of a representative of Grenada. I said you had to be crazy, it has no basis. I said Mr Resteiner was terminated when it was found out that he was not clean. I proceeded to tell him I don’t think you are crazy to print this. He said he can’t be sure. I told him it would be a sad day if he printed something against somebody based on an allegation by a man who is now having problems. He called back again and said he was going to print the article because he was satisfied and there was enough basis in it. I said okay and that we would meet in the court of law.
Q: Did you ever take those allegations seriously?

A: I did not take it seriously the first time. But when this guy Marchant called I had to take it serious. Anything that is published against a Prime Minister has enormous implications for the country’s image and my ability to continue to govern the country properly. I had to take it seriously.

Q: The news letter was published on the 30th of April this year. How long after did you actually see it?

A: I think it was probably the day after. They made sure they sent a copy to my office. That is when my press secretary brought it to my attention.

Q: Since that publication and following the outburst of the Opposition, what has been the response within your own Government and party about what was printed?

A: What I did first, was to call my colleagues early and tell them the facts. I told them nothing will come out differently. I told them that these allegations will prove to be groundless, but that I owe it to them to let them know before it became a public matter. I told my party members, that was how I handled it.

Q: What has been the response from the general public in Grenada?

A: The truth is that I cannot tell you that I have felt any anger or discomfort from people. I have gotten a lot of sympathy on the part of a lot of people who have been calling. Every person I speak to, I have to repeat the story of the allegations...repeat and repeat...that was tough. It was the toughest part of this whole thing. Generally speaking, and outside of the Opposition elements, I found there was a lot of sympathy from good-minded Grenadians with a sense of responsibility, who called with suggestions to say how it should have been handled. They felt that the country, and my name should be cleared as soon as possible, and which is fundamentally what I should expect.
Basically, I would say I felt a lot of sympathy, understanding and concern from the population. For my party members, it was a shock for them. It was difficult for them to accept. I had to meet family members, my mother. It was very difficult for them to have to deal with it. These were some of the things which I had to face, to see these people go through this thing. It was not easy.
Q: Whose idea it was to have a Commission of Inquiry?

A: The Governor General is a wise person, a lot of years in the public service, and of course he is a lawyer. He understands the statement and the effect on individuals and a country. He raised the subject and I gave him absolute support. There was no doubt in my mind. I was thinking of approaching him to do that at the same point he approached me to do that. It was his initiative initially.

Q: Do you think that this issue puts your political career on the line?

A: If it was true, well clearly I could not continue as Prime Minister of this country and political leader of my party. Anybody with any sense of patriotism for his country will not want to continue in any responsible position with such an allegation over this head.

Q: Today at the inquiry, a guy called Chester Humphrey asked the Commissioner for you to step down as Minister of National Security to allow the police to conduct an impartial investigation. What is your response to that?

A: No response...this fellow wanted me out. He never supported me. He always wanted to see me off the scene. He has been 100 percent nasty to my Government and to me personally. He is a person hurting every time he sees me in Government. His blood pressure goes up, so he has a problem. I expect nothing less from him.

Q: Do you feel confident that the Caribbean Court of Justice will be independent and will be a proper replacement for the Privy Council?

A: Yes, I feel so, and I feel very strongly about that. I find it difficult to see any Caribbean person with any sense of dignity will want to imply that the final court of jurisdiction in the region is any less independent than the Privy Council in England. I have faith in our judicial process. We are maturing in every respect. I think it is about time we control our final court.

Q: Do you feel we have suitably qualified jurists among us to sit on such a court?

A: There is no doubt in my mind that there exist many of our Caribbean nationals who have been serving in Supreme Courts all around the world. Justice Isaac for example is a Grenadian who has been Chief Justice of Canada for years. A number of our jurists have been on the African continent. We have lawyers here in the region, if given the opportunity, will be allowed to serve in the Supreme Court around the world. I have no doubt we have the legal experts with integrity and skills and objectivity and independence to give us a Court of Justice of which we will all be proud.

Q: I know you have said a lot about Haiti and the responses from some heads of CARICOM. What has been the latest concerning Haiti?

A: There are a few leaders who felt strongly that they are not satisfied that we have reached a point where we shall engage Haiti. The majority of leaders felt we should. Because of the need to have consensus, we have decided to at least consult some more. We decided to give others an opportunity, who have their doubts, to do some more research based on the areas of concern relative to what is happening in Haiti. And, hopefully, we can then agree to have a meeting of heads where we can trash out our differences before November. I honestly believe, that waiting for November, might not necessarily be the best thing.

In November, when the heads are due to meet, we have some major decisions to take, a number of issues that cannot wait. I fear with Haiti being such an emotionally-charged issue and such a far reaching one that if we move into November at that meeting with Haiti still in the air, it will occupy most of the time and we will not reach... we will not be able to achieve the results of that meeting. That is one of the reasons I am advising, advancing and discussing with heads that we should move to have a meeting as early as possible.