UDP Senator Mike Peyrefitte is again using the Freedom of Information Act to force the government to disclose the extent of the business relationship it has with the law firm whose joint partners are two Ministers of State. That's Courtenay Coye LLP, and the firm's name has turned up in a recent government litigation before the Supreme Court.
And Trinidadian Queens Counsel, Douglas Mendes - one of the region's top legal minds - is also the Briceno Administration's lawyer of choice for most suits brought against it.
Now this type of hiring practice may sound like a page right out of the UDP playbook, but Peyrefitte today told us via Zoom that even if it is - the PUP said it would do better. Here's our interview with him:
Hon. Michael Peyrefitte, UDP Senator
"They use to complain all the time about when the UDP would outsourced legal work and you are doing the same thing that they use to accuse us of and all we want to know is how much the government has paid Douglas Mendez, Queen's counsel from Trinidad and how much they have paid Courtenay Coye LLP for work being done for the government - how much they've been paid and how much they contracted to get paid and what do we owe them for work being done. Thats the people's money and we have a right to know how it will be spent."
Jules Vasquez
"What really are you criticising? Are you criticising something that your former government made into standard practice?"
Hon. Michael Peyrefitte, UDP Senator
"Barrow and Williams? Are saying that Barrow and Williams was retained by the UDP government under the UDP?"
Jules Vasquez
"For government related work."
Hon. Michael Peyrefitte, UDP Senator
"Are you saying Barrow and Williams, the lawfirm was retained?"
Jules Vasquez
"If they work for BTL, BTL is government related. The driving shareholder in BTL is the government of Belize."
Hon. Michael Peyrefitte, UDP Senator
"This is why I am asking you, no. Sir, on the books BTL is a private company. Like I said even if you want to make that argument, I maintained that Barrow and Williams was not retained by the government of Belize. Secondly, if you want to maintain that argument and for argument's sake saying we accept that, which we do not. What we are saying is that they made a lot of noise about it. They said that so much was wrong about it and so now they promise that it was so wrong that they would be different, that they would do things so differently and you have a case now where you have not just one member of cabinet, but 2 members of cabinet. One, the foreign minister Eamon Courtenay and two, the minister of state for finance who would be the one paying his own lawfirm for work to be done on behalf of the government. It doesn't matter that you say that you believe previous people use to do it, you say you would be different. You say you wouldn't do this. Members of your current administration use to rail hell in parliament about this. Your hypocrisy must be exposed."
We today got comment from both of the partners in Courtenay Coye, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Eamon Courtney, and Minister of State in the Ministry of Finance, Chris Coye.
Coye says, quote, "I look forward to the relevant processes being fully availed as provided for and to the disclosure requested."
While, Courtenay said, quote, "This is a straight forward matter and full disclosure will be made. Nothing to hide."
We also asked the senior partner in Barrow and Williams, Dean Barrow for comment, about the practices when he was Prime Minister. He said that his firm was never retained by the government of Belize, but conceded it may have been retained by statutory boards and other bodies that have autonomy.
Peyrefitte says that this disclosure he is requesting is a matter or urgent interest because he sees the government appealing a case in which he is the claimant and Barrow is the attorney - and GOB may end up paying fees that are higher than the costs which were awarded to the claimants:
Hon. Michael Peyrefitte, UDP Senator
"My issue at this point is how much are they being paid, because we are being told that they are being paid exorbitant amounts of money and we want to know why. Like for example: We were awarded cost in the SMART case, the 365 Microsoft cost case, they have appealed that decision. The awarding of cost and the amount that we want and they've hired Douglas Mendez to do the appeal for them. Given the amount of cost that we were asking for, we are almost sure that the amount of cost that we are asking for is less than what they would have to pay Douglas Mendez given what we know his rates to be. So, you're just paying these people huge amounts of money just to be spiteful, for example."
Under the law, Government has two weeks to respond to a freedom of information request.
