Vincent Nelson loses Appeal Court bid to challenge corruption conviction

Convicted attorney Vincent Nelson, KC. - File photo

CONVICTED King’s Counsel Vincent Nelson has lost his plea to the Appeal Court for permission to challenge his 2019 corruption conviction.

Justices Nolan Bereaux, James Aboud and Geoffrey Henderson on July 29 ruled Nelson failed to prove misconduct by state officials and waited too long to file his appeal.

Justice Henderson, delivering the decision of the three-judge panel, said Nelson, a UK-based tax attorney, voluntarily entered a plea deal in 2019 and had every chance to tell the trial judge about any promises or threats he now claims led to his guilty plea. Nelson was represented by senior counsel at the time but raised no concerns about improper inducements.

Nelson pleaded guilty in June 2019 to conspiracy to commit corruption and money laundering in a legal-fee kickback scheme. He was fined $2.25 million in March 2020 after agreeing to testify against former attorney general Anand Ramlogan, SC, and ex-UNC senator Gerald Ramdeen. Those cases were dropped in 2022 after Nelson refused to testify until a $95 million civil claim over an alleged indemnity agreement was resolved. The judge in that matter is still to deliver a ruling.

In his appeal, Nelson argued that former attorney general Faris Al-Rawi promised him immunity, a pardon and payment of fees, and that he only gave a self-incriminating statement because he believed he was protected. Justice Henderson noted that Nelson offered no sworn statement from the attorney who relayed the alleged promise, and the evidence showed he acted voluntarily throughout the plea process.

On the issue of delay, the court found Nelson’s October 2023 appeal was filed more than four years after his conviction and over three years after sentencing. Henderson said Nelson’s explanations, including illness and an expectation of a pardon, were not convincing enough to justify the lengthy delay.

The court concluded that granting an extension would undermine the integrity of plea agreements, which rely on safeguards in the Criminal Procedure (Plea Discussion and Plea Agreement) Act. “No satisfactory or convincing reasons have been proffered which justify the lengthy delay,” Henderson wrote.

In his appeal, Nelson contended he was misled by broken promises, threats, and executive overreach.

Nelson’s appeal notice was filed in October 2023 – five years late. His lawyers, led by Edward Fitzgerald, KC, say he missed the 14-day deadline because of state misconduct surrounding his plea agreement. Justice of Appeal Mark Mohammed dismissed an earlier application last year, prompting this new bid before the three-member panel.

Fitzgerald claimed Nelson only provided a self-incriminating statement after Al-Rawi promised immunity, a pardon, and payment of outstanding fees. He said Nelson was a confidential informant whose identity should have been protected, but the state “flagrantly” broke the agreement.

“Why would he put his head in a noose unless he believed he was protected?” Fitzgerald asked, noting Nelson was paid £1 million ($8.99 million) just days after giving the statement.

He argued Nelson was “tricked.”

“It may have been a false promise, a trick, an overreach, but we say that a promise was made.”

The DPP’s lead attorney, Ian Benjamin, SC, argued, however, that Nelson was a seasoned barrister who knowingly entered a plea deal and waited years to challenge it for personal advantage.

“He wanted leverage, a ‘strong bargaining position,’” Benjamin said, adding that Nelson’s affidavit was riddled with contradictions. “He led, initiated, designed and executed the strategy of negotiation with the [former] attorney general.”

Benjamin also stressed that only the DPP controls prosecutions and pardons come solely from the Mercy Committee, not the attorney general.

“There is no prospect of success,” he concluded.

Henderson, a former DPP, was in agreement.

“Standing against the applicant’s claim of inducement is a body of material that demonstrates that the applicant voluntarily pleaded guilty.

“On the totality of the credible and admissible evidence, the applicant has not discharged his burden establishing that the courts’ process has been abused or that he is likely to succeed on this ground should leave to appeal be granted.”

Nelson is yet to pay the $2.25 million fine imposed on him.

Naveen Maraj and Varun Debideen also represented Nelson. Tekiyah Jorsling and Tonya Rowley appeared for the DPP.