Former diplomat granted leave to challenge revocation

Justice Frank Seepersad yesterday granted Charles leave to pursue his judicial review claim. In a 15-page written decision, Seepersad held that Charles raised arguable grounds that had a realistic prospect of success at trial.

The judge also held that Charles’ argument that the prime minister did not possess a prerogative power in relation to the appointment and removal of an ambassador, was an argument “not devoid of merit” and one which he considered arguable with a realistic prospect of success.

“The nature and gravity of the issues raised in this matter are serious and can have an impact on the way in which all career Ambassadors are treated,” Seepersad said.

In his lawsuit filed in January, Charles of Union Hall, Cross Crossing, argued that the decision of the prime minister to revoke his appointment was illegal, made in bad faith and was contrary to fundamental human rights provided for under the Constitution. He contended that he was not provided equality of treatment and that he had a legitimate expectation to maintain his rank and position as Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary upon returning to Trinidad and Tobago and the decision of the prime minister to revoke his appointment was a deprivation of his legitimate expectation that he would have retained his position.

According to Charles, he was appointed Ambassador in March 2012.

Charles said at the end of 2015, he was asked by the acting permanent secretary of the Foreign Affairs Ministry to submit his resume which he did although this was not the norm. He said that on September 20, 2016, he received an instrument of revocation of his appointment.

The matter has been adjourned to December 4.

Charles is represented by attorney Devesh Maharaj while Senior Counsel Reginald Armour, Vanessa Gopaul and Nadine Nabbie appear for the prime minister and the Cabinet.