THE Trotman affair is setting an extremely dangerous precedent which will surely negatively affect the functioning of our justice system. 

It seems that the AFC is indeed bent on making history in this country for all the wrong reasons. Its main reason for existence is to remove the PPP/C and it has made this an open secret.
The AFC has claimed that Trotman’s sodomy allegation is a set up by the PPP/C to remove the Speaker so that he cannot pronounce on the ‘no-confidence motion,’ and as a result, that motion cannot be carried out. This is most ridiculous, since the Speaker can be replaced and the debate on the motion will not in the least be affected. Mr. Trotman himself made such a conclusion. This is just as absurd as the $30M bribery claim made by Mr. Ramjattan. Is 30 a magical figure? Jesus was sold for 30 pieces of silver! I am sure that the 30 came naturally from this Biblical story.
However, what is astonishing is the fact that an injunction has been granted in favour of Mr. Trotman so that the alleged victim, Mr. Welshman, is effectively ‘gagged’ from telling his side of the story. This is an extremely dangerous legal precedent and one which has the propensity to allow the accused person in a rape allegation to use the legal system as a shield, and at the same time, restraining the victim. This will ensure that the alleged rapist gets public sympathy, and at the same time, create an atmosphere of hostility towards the victim. In other words, the legal system has already taken side with the alleged rapist. Moreover, the investigation will be adversely affected because witnesses will be afraid to come forward. But this is not the first time that the lawyers in the AFC have succeeded in perverting the course of justice and displayed their penchant for practising conflict of interest.
The lawyers within the AFC need to understand that justice must not only be done, but it must be seen to be done. Mr. Trotman should allow the justice system to work instead of using his money, status and influence to impact on the allegations levelled at him by a person who was merely a child at that time.
There are certain questions which need to be answered and it will be in Mr. Trotman’s favour to answer them truthfully.
If Mr. Trotman believed that Mr. Welshman is ‘an unstable young man who appears to have a troubled mind’, why did he give this young man two recommendations so that he could gain employment?
Why was Mr. Trotman negotiating a cash settlement with this ‘unstable young man’?
Why didn’t Mr. Trotman expose the alleged victim at that first instance? Why did he allow the alleged victim to go public before he did? He could have denied the allegation at the inception!
Why did one of the suspects tell the alleged victim that ‘you could have come to me first’? Is this not suggesting an attempt to cover up the alleged criminal act?
Why did Mr. Trotman hastily sue the young man for $50 million before the matter is fully investigated? Is this not another attempt to ‘gag’ the alleged victim?
Why did the victim’s mother fully support her son’s alleged rape accusation?
It must be recalled that the alleged victim did indeed accuse his father and his friend of sexually abusing him at the very inception, so the later response by the father to negate the allegation against Mr. Trotman can be fully appreciated.
In conclusion, we can expect that in the near future, the affluent people in our society can follow the Trotman precedent and wriggle their way out of rape allegations. It is time that someone take a hard look at the corrupt practices within our legal system. It is said that justice is, but injunctions are now used to make it deaf and dumb as well!
Yours sincerely,
Haseef Yusuf
AFC Councillor Region 6