CEPEP gives

Senior Multimedia Reporter

[email protected]

The Community-Based Environmental Protection and Enhancement Programme (CEPEP), led by its legal team from Freedom Law Chambers, has escalated legal action against former chairman Joel Edwards, alleging fraud, misrepresentation, and breach of fiduciary duty.

This follows the High Court’s referral of the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for possible criminal investigation.

In an August 7 letter, Edwards’ attorney, St Clair Michael O’Neil, sought more time to respond, indicating that Edwards had travel plans and would be out of the country until the end of August.

However, CEPEP’s attorney, Jared Jagroo from Freedom Law Chambers, queried why Edwards could not provide instructions via email or a virtual meeting. Jagroo accused Edwards of having a flippant attitude to what was a serious issue with criminal and civil consequences in law.

In an affidavit filed in the High Court, Edwards claimed the board note signed and circulated for the extension of all CEPEP contracts was done in error and that a revised amended board note was circulated.

He claimed he could not find the amended board notes in his records. However, Edwards did not respond to CEPEP CEO Keith Eddy’s statement that Edwards had informed him the line minister, Faris Al-Rawi, said the Cabinet had approved the contract extensions.

Eddy’s evidence stated that the board note should be prepared on Edwards’s instruction on the basis that the Cabinet had granted the approval and that the board was simply ratifying that decision.

Eddy stated he was not prepared to extend over 300 contracts without Cabinet approval because CEPEP would be committing itself and the Government to $1.4 billion in expenditure.

Both Edwards and Eddy were appointed by the former PNM administration. Tendered into evidence was a WhatsApp correspondence dated April 3, 2025, between Edwards and Eddy in which Edwards told Eddy to be careful of Al-Rawi.

Attorney Jagroo maintained there was no evidence of Cabinet approval and no record of Edwards’ claim that the original board note contained an “error” later corrected.

CEPEP, represented by Anand Ramlogan, SC, said this assertion contradicts Edwards’ own signed instructions and the absence of any correction circulated to board members.

The dispute stems from CEPEP’s April 2025 decision to extend contracts without formal Cabinet approval, a move flagged by the Finance Ministry’s Permanent Secretary as a major financial risk.

CEPEP, through its attorneys, has given Edwards until 4 pm on Friday to respond or face legal proceedings for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and misfeasance in public office.

Last week, the case involving CEPEP and Edwards escalated following the court ruling by Justice Margaret Mohammed and ongoing investigations. The court stayed a claim brought by Eastman Enterprise Limited, pending further review and a referral to the DPP. Justice Mohammed ruled that the claim that the renewals were facilitated based on a fraudulent misrepresentation of Cabinet approval, allegedly given to Edwards by Al-Rawi, was sufficient enough to be probed by the DPP’s Office.

The case centres on the extension of 336 CEPEP contracts worth approximately $1.4 billion.

The court found that the proper procedures outlined in the contract were not followed before filing the claim. The board note, central to the dispute, was allegedly prepared on Edwards’ instructions.

CEPEP’s lawyers also questioned the involvement of Al-Rawi in approving the extensions. On Friday, Al-Rawi said he had no issue with the DPP investigating, saying, “Any proper investigation into this matter and any questions arising are welcome.”

However, he has not directly addressed the allegation that he gave Edwards assurances that the renewal of the contracts was approved by the then-Cabinet.