I did not authorise visit of AG’s children to shooting range

Maharaj described as “erroneous” the contents of the TTDF’s response to United National Congress senator Wayne Sturge who submitted a request for information after photographs of Al-Rawi’s children posing with, what appeared to be, high-powered rifles belonging to the TTDF were made public.

In a letter dated April 25 and addressed to Sturge, Chief of Defence Staff Brigadier Rodney Smart said based on evidence adduced by a board of inquiry (BOI) established to conduct an investigation into the issue, Al-Rawi’s children accompanied him to the Regiment’s Cumuto Barracks on October 31, 2015. Smart said Al-Rawi was invited to witness a tactical display so that he would become familiar with the set of actions his security team may have to employ in the event of an incident.

Smart said the BOI deduced that Al-Rawi’s children were not allowed to have high powered weapons belonging to the TTDF in the presence of Al-Rawi and members of the TTDF and there was no evidence that anyone in the TTDF was complicit in the performance of their duties.

“It was established that the former chief of defence staff Major General Kenrick Maharaj, acting on his own volition, authorised the range practice,” Smart said.

“This practice is a standard procedure which is offered to all high risk national leaders who come under the protection of members of the defence Force’s Special Operations elements. Consequently, there was no evidence that any member of the Defence Force was coerced into breaching any practice of procedure.” Maharaj, in his statement yesterday, said given the context of this particular situation, the statement that he acted on his own volition can reasonably be interpreted to mean “authorisation for any or all activities in relation to the matter under scrutiny, including the issue of children handling weapons on the range at Cumuto Barracks on the day in question.” “I am gravely concerned, from a position of absolute denial in granting such authorisation, that I was not informed of testimony to that effect in the BOI and therefore a fundamental requirement for me to attend the BOI to confirm or deny such an allegation /accusation,” Maharaj said.

“Notwithstanding this, it is noted that the statement “acting on his own volition” is language commonly associated with the criminal law environment and therefore has negative connotations in that regard. It is highly unusual to ascribe such language to the decision- making process of a chief of defence staff, and so leaves one to wonder in this circumstance, if there was an underlying intent to cause mischief by the person who drafted the TTDF response to Senator Sturge.

“Even if a chief of defence staff exercises his “initiative” in any given instance, his ultimate decision is usually based on staff a advice (feasibility, suitability etc), and the subsequent execution by personnel down the chain of command.” Maharaj said he is deeply concerned that the “disturbingly misleading statements” in Smart’s response carry the potential to do serious harm to his character and reputation. He said he wanted to place on the record that he did not authorise the range practice conducted at Cumuto Barracks, he did not invite Al-Rawi to any military base to attend any range firing activity, he did not have any communications with Al-Rawi on the matter at any time, and he was not at Cumuto Barracks on the day in question. Consequently, Maharaj said he is not aware of who would have received Al-Rawi and his family at that military installation on that day and what protocols were observed.

He is calling for Smart to retract the statements in areas where he has been named and an amended document be prepared and re-submitted to Sturge. Also being sought is a public statement to “undo the hurt” caused to Maharaj and his family.

“I conclude with the recommendation that when matters such as the one in question, with high political sensitivities and public interest have to be addressed by the Trinidad and Tobago Defence Force, the organisation should not engage in compromise in respect of its professional ethics and proper procedure. Greater attention should have been given to procedural accuracy, the judicious use of language as well as exercising greater prudence in treating with a former chief of defence staff.”