Hilaire fails to reach settlement over firing as Central Bank governor

Dr Alvin Hilaire, fired Central Bank governor - File photo by Angelo Marcelle

Fired Central Bank governor Dr Alvin Hilaire is expected to file a claim in the High Court challenging his dismissal and seeking damages, after failed attempts to reach an out-of-court settlement with the state.

His legal team, led by Stuart Young, SC, attorney Imran Ali and Anthony Bullock, had issued a pre-action protocol letter demanding urgent review of the Cabinet’s advice to President Christine Kangaloo to revoke his appointment on June 24.

According to the letter, Hilaire’s removal was unlawful, alleging that the Cabinet acted in bad faith and for political purposes when it advised his termination under Section 12 of the Central Bank Act. That provision allows for dismissal only in cases of misconduct or failure to perform statutory duties. Hilaire, who was first appointed governor in December 2015 and reappointed twice, was due to serve until December 2026.

The letter further alleged that Planning and Economic Affairs Minister Dr Kennedy Swaratsingh met with Hilaire hours before his dismissal, urging him to resign and accept a government payout for the remainder of his term. When he declined, because of the need for legal advice, he was later handed a revocation notice signed on the advice of the Cabinet.

The correspondence set out details of the purported exchange between Swaratsingh and Hilaire. It claimed that the minister met with Hilaire around 11.30 am on June 24 at the latter’s office and said the Government wanted him to vacate the office of Governor, offering that he would be paid in full for the remainder of his contract if he resigned immediately.

Hilaire was reported in the letter to have questioned where such funds would come from, since the Bank’s budget had no provision for it, and Board approval would be required. The letter stated that Swaratsingh replied that the money would come from Government finances and that he would sign off on the transaction as minister in the Ministry of Finance. It further alleged that the minister said Hilaire should provide his estimated earnings so that the Attorney General could issue a letter confirming the buyout.

The document also claimed that the minister conveyed the Prime Minister considered Hilaire’s refusal to involve the Auditor General in the Central Bank’s accounts as the “last straw.” It noted that the Government had raised concerns over the handling of the Bank’s external auditing arrangements, particularly the decision to replace the Auditor General with the private firm, BDO.

The letter maintained that the Auditor General had voluntarily ceased to serve as the Bank’s auditor in 2024 and that the Bank had followed procurement rules in contracting BDO as a replacement. It stressed that BDO had no links to Angus Young, who left the firm in 2014, and that Finance Minister Davendranath Tancoo had been fully briefed.

The letter further alleged that Swaratsingh told Hilaire that the new Government wanted its own people in key positions, including the Central Bank. It also stated that when Hilaire requested legal advice, the minister warned that a decision was needed quickly since a new Governor was to be appointed later that day, and that failure to resign would result in his removal.

It was also alleged that later that afternoon, Swaratsingh returned with a letter signed by the Attorney General, which promised payment equivalent to Hilaire’s remaining contract “as soon as possible,” though the amount was left blank. The letter said the minister again pressed for a resignation, but Hilaire repeated his request for legal advice. Around 7 pm, the minister reportedly returned and handed Hilaire a notice revoking his appointment as governor.

The pre-action letter maintained that the Central Bank is a statutory corporation governed by its Board of Directors under section 5 of the Central Bank Act, and not by Cabinet. It noted that the Act provides that a Governor may only be removed for specific reasons set out in section 12.

The letter contended that Hilaire was the target of an “orchestrated plot” to oust him so the government could install its preferred candidate. It argued that the Cabinet lacked legal authority to remove the governor outside of statutory grounds, and that the process breached constitutional rights to due process and protection of the law.

“Counsel have advised that the interaction between Minister Swaratsingh and Dr Hilaire on June 24, 2025, was clearly unlawful.

“Furthermore, there was no legal basis for the advice that was given to Her Excellency, the President, that Dr Hilaire's appointment be terminated on the basis that he was guilty of misconduct and/or that he had failed to carry out any of the duties and functions conferred or imposed on him under the Central Bank Act.

“Instead, Dr Hilaire's case is that he was the victim of a clearly orchestrated plot to illegally procure his resignation from the office of Governor and, failing that, to illegally terminate his appointment as Governor.

“In the premises, counsel have advised that the Cabinet's decision to advise Her Excellency, the President, to terminate Dr. Hilaire's appointment was illegal, null, void and of no effect.”

The former governor is seeking declaratory relief, reinstatement of his position, and damages totalling $9.8 million for loss of income, emotional distress, and breach of constitutional rights.

When contacted, Swaratsingh deferred all questions on the allegations raised in the letter to the Attorney General. “The Attorney General is the legal advisor to the Cabinet and the Government. So anything in the public space, we have to refer to the Attorney General.”

Attorney General John Jeremie, SC, also did not respond to questions for comment on the claims in the letter.