PORT OF SPAIN, Trinidad – The Trinidad and Tobago Court of Appeal has delivered a significant ruling denying Jamaican-born King’s Counsel Vincent Nelson permission to challenge his 2019 corruption conviction before the London-based Privy Council, the nation’s highest judicial authority.
In a decisive oral judgment delivered by Justice Nolan Bereaux on behalf of Justices James Aboud and Ricky Rahim, the appellate court concurred with state prosecutors that Nelson’s application concerned procedural matters rather than substantive constitutional issues warranting Privy Council intervention. The court determined that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) had not violated Nelson’s constitutional rights and that all due process safeguards had been properly observed during the plea agreement proceedings.
This ruling follows a July decision where the same judicial panel found Nelson failed to demonstrate prosecutorial misconduct and had exceeded acceptable time limits for filing his appeal. The court emphasized that Nelson, a UK-based tax attorney, had voluntarily entered into a plea agreement in 2019 while represented by senior counsel and had ample opportunity to disclose any alleged improper inducements during the original proceedings.
The case stems from Nelson’s June 2019 guilty plea to conspiracy charges involving corruption and money laundering related to a legal-fee kickback scheme. He received a TT$2.25 million fine in March 2020 after agreeing to testify against former Attorney General Anand Ramlogan and former government senator Gerald Ramdeen. Those prosecutions were ultimately discontinued in 2022 when Nelson refused to testify pending resolution of a TT$95 million civil claim, which has since been dismissed by the High Court.
In his appeal application, Nelson contended that former Attorney General Faris Al-Rawi had promised him immunity, a pardon, and payment of legal fees in exchange for his self-incriminating statement. However, Justice Geoffrey Henderson noted Nelson failed to provide sworn evidence from the attorney who allegedly conveyed these promises, and the court record indicated Nelson acted voluntarily throughout the plea process.
The court also highlighted the extraordinary delay in Nelson’s appeal filing—submitted more than four years after conviction and three years after sentencing, far exceeding the standard 14-day deadline. Justices rejected Nelson’s explanations of illness and anticipated pardon as insufficient justification for the delay.
Represented by King’s Counsel Edward Fitzgerald, Nelson’s legal team argued their client had been ‘tricked’ into providing evidence with false promises of protection. Conversely, Senior Counsel Ian Benjamin, representing the DPP, characterized Nelson as a seasoned legal professional who strategically delayed his challenge for leverage purposes, describing Nelson’s affidavit as ‘contradictory and self-serving.’ Nelson remains obligated to pay the outstanding TT$2.25 million fine imposed by the court.