Who is popular today?

OPPOSITION Senator Wade Mark has alleged that when the AG earlier piloted the Arbitration Bill he had not declared any interest in a company offering arbitration services, which he said was in breach of the rules of Parliament.
But Culture Minister Randall Mitchell, himself an attorney, said all attorneys may have been involved in companies involved in arbitration at some point in time.
Mark said, "Under standing order 42(5), I wanted to ask the Attorney General, who piloted this bill today, why he did not declare, why did the AG not declare his interest in this bill?
"That is a contempt of this honourable Parliament.
"If you have a previous or a current financial or pecuniary interest in any company that promoted arbitration in this country, I'm asking why the AG...?"
Vice President Dr Muhammad Yunus Ibrahim said, "Within the remit of the introduction of the bill by the honourable AG all matters would have come to pass that needed to come to pass. If it is needed that he needs to clarify, you can ask so in summation, but your comments are bordering on another standing order, of imputing improper motives."
He asked Mark to address the bill's clauses.
Mark said, "Mr Vice President, I have evidence that I am standing by. You could take me to the Privileges Committee, because I have it. I have evidence to show where our AG, who piloted this bill, was the chairman of a company called Dialogue Solutions. I have the evidence here. "
Mitchell interrupted, saying, "On a point of order, the AG is titular head of the Bar. The AG is Senior Counsel of long standing, and this is a matter of law."
He said obviously Armour had an interest in arbitration as an aspect of the practice of law.
Mark persisted. "In 2019 the AG, in private practice, was chairman of a company called Dialogue Solutions. I'm not casting any aspersions. Facts I have here."
He said the AG had a duty to disclose any past interests.
He wanted Armour to say if the company was alive or dead or had been bought out by someone else.
Mark named two other directors of the company, prompting Senate Leader Dr Amery Browne to say he had gone too far.
Mark replied, "I'm prepared for any member to take me to the Committee of Privileges! Because I have the evidence here!"
After a stormy session, he said, "I think I've said enough on this matter to allow the AG, when he is winding up, to make a confession."
On the idea of state capture, Mark hoped cartels would not control the arbitration industry valued at a potential of $25 billion (presumably globally).
De Freitas said Mark had not addressed matters within the bill, but rather had been "going down one particular line."
Mark said the debate should include the policy, principle and merits of the bill, albeit with deeper details to come at committee stage.
He asked if the bill had an arbitrators' code of ethics, like in the 2004 Mediation Act.
While saying the AG had abrogated to himself the power to make rules and regulations, Mark said in many civil litigants will sue the AG, who under the law was therefore in a conflicted situation.
"I'm suggesting we delete that completely, or, if he's not deleting it, bring the entire Parliament into it."
Mark suggested the bill should be amended to add a requirement for an annual report on arbitration to be submitted to Parliament, and to update the legislation every three years.
He asked how TT would promote arbitration while an global index has shown a decline in the rule of law in TT.
Mitchell, in his contribution afterwards, defended Armour, describing Mark's speech as "disingenuous and dangerous" and meant to scandalise individuals.
"The AG might have been part of a company called Dialogue Solutions Ltd. I don't know. All attorneys inside this chamber and outside this chamber may have been involved in arbitration at some time. Similarly, we might have been involved in contract-drafting at some time."
The post Mark, Mitchell argue over Armour’s firm appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.