The previous article set out my criticism of the CLF bailout situation in respect of the CARICOM claims and our nation’s treaty obligation to exercise non-discrimination in its policies. In that light I am sceptical of the position now being advanced by the CLF shareholders to highlight that group as being a black-controlled conglomerate. My scepticism was rooted in the apparent refusal or failure of either the CLF shareholders or the T&T State to accept responsibility to meet CARICOM claims arising from the 2009 collapse of CLF.
I am stating here what seem to be the four indispensable elements of an equitable settlement to this CLF bailout.
Settlement of non-T&T claims arising from the collapse of CLF –
I have been reliably informed that the Policyholders in one OECS Member State have sent Pre-Action Protocol letters to the Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago in pursuance of their CLF claim. This course of action followed after this OECS Member Government twice wrote to the Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago without having the benefit of a response. Clearly wholly unsatisfactory in terms of international diplomacy, particularly in the context of Trinidad and Tobago as a leading CARICOM State, More Developed Country (MDC) and the other CARICOM State, as a Less Developed Country (LDC) in the context of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas (RTC). Should matters attendant to the question of fair and equitable treatment between CARICOM Members proceed to litigation they will be expected to be heard by the CCJ which is the Court of Record for disputes arising within the ambit of the Revised Treat of Chaguaramas. If this were to proceed to the CCJ, it would be yet another layer of litigation to be resolved at public expense before the issue can be settled. Consider also that other CARICOM members have not yet litigated so there is a clear and present danger that those states whose citizens’ claims have not been satisfied could join into the entire lawsuit.