Jaiwantie Ramdass (Respondent) v Minister of Finance and another (Appellants) (Trinidad and Tobago)

Case summary

Case ID

JCPC/2024/0057

Jurisdiction

Trinidad and Tobago

Parties

Appellant(s)

Minister of Finance, Cabinet of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago

Respondent(s)

Jaiwantee Ramdass

Issue

Should the Respondent, the Auditor General (“AG”), be permitted to bring a judicial review of the Appellants’ decision to investigate the AG’s approach to auditing the 2023 public accounts, on the basis that that decision was vitiated by apparent bias and/or in breach of the Constitution?

Facts

The Respondent has been AG of Trinidad and Tobago since November 2023. Sections 116 and 136 of the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago contain specific provisions to safeguard the AG’s independence and insulation from political pressure. By statute, the AG is required to conduct an annual audit of the public accounts provided by the Ministry of Finance (“MOF”). On 31 January 2024 (the statutory deadline), the MOF provided the AG with a set of public accounts for 2023 (“1st Accounts”). The AG audited the 1st Accounts. Having completed, but not yet submitted, the audit, the AG was informed by the MOF that the 1st Accounts had understated public revenue by c.$2.6 billion. On 15 April 2024, the MOF sent the AG new accounts, dated to 31 January 2024, reflecting that higher revenue (“2nd Accounts”). The AG initially resisted accepting the 2nd Accounts because her audit was complete, but did so following a threat of legal action. The AG audited the 2nd Accounts but could not verify the increase in revenue reported by the MOF. The AG noted this in the audit report she submitted on the 2023 accounts. On 7 May 2024, the Cabinet accepted a reccomendation from the Minister of Finance (then acting-Prime Minister) to appoint an investigation team (“IT”). The IT’s terms of reference included investigating the AG’s response to the 2nd Accounts, the audit report statements made by the AG in relation to the 2nd Accounts, and any related matters, findings and recommendations. On 16 May 2024, the AG sought leave to judicially review the decision to appoint the IT with those terms of reference. The AG argued that that decision (i) was tainted by apparent bias; and (ii) breached the AG’s constitutional protections. On 3 June 2024, the High Court refused the AG’s application. On 21 June 2024, following an urgent hearing, the High Court’s decision was overturned by the Court of Appeal, and the AG was granted leave to bring a judicial review. The Appellants now appeal to His Majesty in Council.

Date of issue

30 July 2024

Judgment details

Judgment date

28 January 2025

Neutral citation

[2025] UKPC 4

Judgment links

Appeal

Justices

Lord Hodge

Lord Sales

Lord Stephens

Lady Rose

Lady Simler

Hearing dates

Start date

7 November 2024

End date

7 November 2024

Watch hearings

Back to top